The more I hate men individually, the more I love humanity.

The more I love humanity in general the less I love man in particular. In my dreams, I often make plans for the service of humanity, and perhaps I might actually face crucifixion if it were suddenly necessary. Yet I am incapable of living in the same room with anyone for two days together. I know from experience. As soon as anyone is near me, his personality disturbs me and restricts my freedom. In twenty-four hours I begin to hate the best of men: one because he’s too long over his dinner, another because he has a cold and keeps on blowing his nose. I become hostile to people the moment they come close to me. But it has always happened that the more I hate men individually the more I love humanity.

Fyodor Dostoevsky “The Brothers Karamazov”

Comments

  1. paradosis says:

    48)
    I don’t see the Judge of All saying, well Chris, I see you admitted you’re a sinner, and I see you stuck by the “right” -ism all your life to keep your RISK of becoming “lost” low and PROBABILITY of repenting high even though most of you’re life you spent in debauch hypocrisy, although you did repent over and over, and fortunately you lucked out and didn’t send for you when you were in the midst of your debauchery….
    so come on up and join me!

    Or has the scripture about ‘when I was hungry, etc…” and “depart from me…” been changed recently?

    If you were living in Turkey and had no vote as a Christian, do you think it would matter which political party -ism you supported there? I’m sure you’ll tell me that’s not a very good example and I’ll be the first to agree with you, but I don’t know how else to say to you that man, you stake a whole lot of importance on something that I don’t think amounts to a hill of beans. If you didn’t, I think you’d be better able to see where you might have some point of commonality with “liberals” as well as “conservatives”, Hindus, Buddhists, aetheists, etc……

    Do you belong to a Christian confession? If so, which one? If Orthodox, then for how long? If Orthodox, I don’t see how you’ve picked up such a need for being such a champion of political “conservatism”. There are sooo many more things within Orthodoxy to champion.

    What’s the relevance of my age except as info for you to infer that I’m immature or find something else to poke at me about it? You’ve now referred to me as “awfully emotive”, confirming my suspicion, as if emotions must be awful.

    And how you get emotive out of nothing more than my analysis of your tactics is beyond me. It’s not like I haven’t seen you be condescending around here or anything like that. So when you go remarking about Trolls …. LOL
    I can laugh at myself. Hope you can too (laugh at yourself).

    49) Too old to speak fluent forum lingo or know all the ropes, but thanks for teaching an old dog something new. You could have just said that I was being “baited” and I would have understood perfectly. I’m not MR.

  2. All “mass movements” are divorced from the reality of what it means to be human.

    Ahem, Christianity is a mass movement! Using the fringes or the radicals of a group to discredit the entire group is intellectually dishonest.

  3. Materialism is materialistic be it communist or capitalist.

    This morally equivalent statement is not only enormously simplistic and wrong, but completely ignores the anti-Christian, anti-freedom, anti-truth, and anti-human fervor of communism and its complete divorce from reality.

    “One has to realize what communism is, not merely a power-mad political regime, but an ideological-religious system whose aim is to overthrow and supplant all other systems, most of all Christianity.”

    “Communism specifically attacked the lands which had most nearly retained their ancient Christian traditions – Russia, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, etc. Propaganda portrayed Bolshevism as a political/social uprising, which is what gullible individuals throughout the world still imagine it to have been. But the “revolution” was far more than this -it was actually a battle against Christianity.”

    – Father Seraphim Rose

    This is exactly what communism, radical secularism, radical environmentalism, (AKA: “liberalism”, “progressives”, etc.) still represent.

  4. Michael Bauman says:

    Re #50. I would disagree that Christianity is a “mass movement”. It is a charismatic, the charismatic movement. Mass movements are delusional copies. Mass movements are founded upon emotion, the surrender of self identity and freedom of will to a cause, the devotion to a human leader, generally if not specifically utopian and a sense of exceptionalism by the adherents and participants. Cults writ large. Some are more poisonous and destructive than others, but they all end up leaving destruction in their wake.

    While there are some mass movements that label themselves Christian, from Marcionism forward all such have been identified as heretical by the Church.

  5. Chris, Michael, Christianity, properly understood, is not a movement at all. The “Way” is Christ crucified, just as the Apostle Paul said.

    Having said that, I know where you are trying to go. But be careful with it. It cannot be defined as a movement even though in sociological terms (but only sociological) it shares characteristics with other movements.

  6. Michael Bauman says:

    By charismatic movement I mean the movement of the Holy Spirit drawing all to Christ, transfiguring us and restoring us to our genuine humanity.

    Of course it is quite easy to distort what that means.

  7. Christopher says:

    note 51:

    I don’t see the Judge of All saying…{shortened for brevity, and lack of clarity)…you were in the midst of your debauchery….
    so come on up and join me!

    What? I think you are trying to be prophetic. Or perhaps you are trying to say I have my priorities wrong – that I should not try to engage/witness to the culture, or talk to others who would help me do that. Perhaps you are saying I should not vote – go live as a monk so to speak – this despite the fact that I live a married life “in the world” (that is, in the economy, both moral and economic, with my American neighbors). Indeed, my married life is recognized as a Sacrament!! Perhaps you should spend more time reading the Fathers. They don’t say what you think they say.

    If you were living in Turkey and had no vote as a Christian, do you think it would matter which political party -ism you supported there?

    It might, I have no idea. BUT IT MATTERS HERE!! What country are your from? You see, in the USA we have a participatory form of government, where your vote really does count (if only a little). Your implication is that I should lay aside my Christianity and not do vote, or witness to the culture?? Are we talking about the same Christianity here??

    you stake a whole lot of importance on something that I don’t think amounts to a hill of beans.

    I do? Perhaps you can tell me more about myself…what am I thinking now…:)

    If you didn’t, I think you’d be better able to see where you might have some point of commonality with “liberals” as well as “conservatives”, Hindus, Buddhists, aetheists, etc……

    What commonality do you speak of? There is lot’s of commonality, from taste in music, the fact that we all like salty foods, to say the Image and Likeness of God found in each of us. So what? This site is about Orthodoxy, and the cultural implications there of. There is lot’s to learn, and lot’s of disagreement in this area. Besides, you make WAY too much of “commonality with liberals and conservatives”. There are deep and profound differences between these two philosophies. One is much more closer to Christianity than the other. You might not like that fact, but it is the truth. What Father have you been reading that tells us to deny the truth. Citation please, I want to read this for myself.

    Do you belong to a Christian confession? If so, which one? If Orthodox, then for how long? If Orthodox, I don’t see how you’ve picked up such a need for being such a champion of political “conservatism”. There are sooo many more things within Orthodoxy to champion.

    Currently OCA. Been in GOARCH and Antiochian. About 12 years now. There are other things, Christ and His salvation being the most important. How is that in conflict with a witness to the culture, and the political/cultural implications of Dogma? Do you think there are none? For example, do you think you can support Democrats and not be held accountable for their unrepentant, full on support of the holocaust of the unborn? Do you think the GOP’s unrepentant support of say, tax breaks for business, is nearly as important, Christianly speaking, as abortion? How old are you????

    What’s the relevance of my age except as info for you to infer that I’m immature or find something else to poke at me about it? You’ve now referred to me as “awfully emotive”, confirming my suspicion, as if emotions must be awful.

    No, but you are quick with the emotive, quick to judge, and shallow on substantive argument. All this from someone who plays at (poorly I might add) at trying to sound prophetic. To be blunt – you sound like a bratty teenager.

    Hope you can too (laugh at yourself).

    Now this is the best thing you have said here. Try to build on it…;)

  8. paradosis says:

    52)
    Materialism is materialistic be it communist or capitalist.

    This morally equivalent statement is not only enormously simplistic and wrong, but completely ignores the anti-Christian, anti-freedom, anti-truth, and anti-human fervor of communism and its complete divorce from reality.

    There can be no “moral equivalency” in a statement that is about -isms not morals. Any -ism has its “dark side”; capitalism may look like an angel to eastern europeans after having suffered through demons of communism, but it’s an angel of light (demon in disguise) whose subtlety can be deadly. While communism is outright antogonistic to Christianity; capitalism is tolerant of “religious freedom”. Communism seeks to supplant religion with worship of the state system; capitalism entices with “freedom”, enslaving citizens through their passions so as slaves they will fight to the death for the false sense of “freedom”. The height of incitement of passions came through the “sexual revolution” of the 1960s which was predicted as much by G.K.Chesterton as early as 1926 who wrote:
    I mean by Capitalism the spirit that is proud of having sold a hundred Paris hats to Spanish peasants without thinking of what it its doing or what it is displacing. But it is not a danger that comes from demagogues but rather from big advertisers;… it will come out of the same big shop as the plutocratic newspapers. …For the NEXT great HERESY is going to be simply an attack on morality; and especially on sexual morality. And it is coming, not from a few Socialists surviving from the Fabian Society, but from the living exultant energy of the rich resolved to enjoy themselves at last, with neither Popery nor Puritanism nor Socialism to hold them back …The madness of tomorrow is not in MOSCOW, but much more in MANHATTEN (i.e. Madison 5th Ave. and Wall Street)

    In the anything goes “free” society of capitalism, communistic forces live inside often undetected by the masses, eating away at them like viruses. You may label this phenomenon “liberalism”, but that does not make it foreign to the economic system of capitalism. In fact capitalists have cozied up with communist over business deals for perhaps a century or more. A “good” capitalist loves to make war because he/she knows it’s good for business (see Gen. Dwight Eisenhour, Gen. Smedley Butler, Chuck Spinney). Any religious alignment with capitalism comes with a Faustian price tag as Charles Marsh warns in Wayward Christian Soldiers. Capitalism is opportunistic, and has feathered its nest most recently by aligning itself with the “christian right” with its modern mix of puritanism wherein the Gospel is perverted with “prosperity gospel” whereby riches are a “sign” of God’s favor; and its dash of pietism that lends a highly charged moralistic atomosphere to the mix. Both of these combine well with the American civic religion and sense of American Exceptionalism.

    Ref:


    Anthony Gramsci

    William Roepke

    The End of Victory Culture

    American Exceptionalism

    Piety and Pietism

    Civic Religion in America

    Religion of the Rich

    Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler

    Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution

    The Best Enemy Money Can Buy

    Sexual Liberation and Political Control

    Behaviorism, Advertising and the Rise of American Empire

  9. Here is where I think the rub is Paradosis: I don’t accept the notion that Orthodoxy is an ideology. You do, at least partially. I see it in your defense of Fr. Kishkovsky. You see an attempt at “balance” in his approach because he references another “culture” apart from the one he critiques. I, on the other hand, don’t think that the other “culture” really exists. (I asked you to define “Orthodox culture” remember? You ignored the question.) Put another way, in my view the culture that really exists is the one we live in.

    For the same reason, I do not accept the Tradition vs. tradition paradigm in which Fr. Kishkovsky frames his critique. The paradigm, in my view, is only a polemic device borrowed from internal Protestant debates by Fr. Schmemann in his battles with ROCOR in the earlier days of the OCA and now (mis)appropriated by Fr. Kishkovsky. The paradigm does not exist as a tangible form in Orthodox ecclesiology. Its only function is to marginalize critics.

    Consequently, my view of Orthodox engagement with the culture is necessarily dynamic and active. Yours is a degree or two or three removed, because you reference an ideal (“Orthodox culture”) that ostensibly exists apart from the culture in which we live and operate. It’s the only way you can draw the conclusion that Fr. Kishkovsky’s critique is balanced and fair while overlooking his defense of the NCC despite its slavish devotion to leftist causes and ideals. (I’ve never understood why an Orthodox Church leader, with roots in Russia no less, would defend an American organization so transparently manipulated by the Soviet leaders during Communism.)

  10. Christopher says:

    Note 58:

    Chesterton did have a “communitarian” side, his “distributionism”. He went too far in wanting to control others, force them to virtue, by a design on the economy and how people are to relate with each other. That said, Capitalism as an ism, as you describe it, is a really just an excess. This is not the result of freedom of capital, or freedom of association, but the result of human passion, as you yourself describe. Now, how are you going to design our economic lives without resorting to limiting freedom, as in “communism”? In “capitalism” people are free to choose virtue or not, but this is not really a function of the economy (those “advertisers” Chesterton identifies as the culprits), but of sin in each of our hearts. Chesterton here is simply being a pig headed elite, looking down on the “Spanish peasants”. He would, in the name of avoiding a heresy, somehow “save” these poor little peasants from themselves and the unprincipled “advertisers” by, what, “distributionism”…

  11. paradosis says:

    60)
    What you call “force to virtue” I call “curb from excessive vice”. I think Chesterton knew better than to try to force anyone to virtue which is impossible, but he knew he could help buffer the vice of mammon worship. Chesterton was not “snubbing” the Spanish peasants, but trying to protect them from a force they were ill prepared to defend themselves against and about which they were ignorant. He was trying to level the capitalist playing field a bit at a time when more and more wealth was falling into fewer and fewer hands no differently than today. To turn this into a darkness in Chesterton is very uncharitable and judgemental of you. What he called “distributionism” is what we call cooperative. The spirit of capitalism is darwinian, competitive, and it’s god is mammon. No one can serve 2 masters but each must choose between God and mammon. The spirit of Christianity is cooperative as enabled by the Holy Spirit. Chesterton was no elitist in the sense that you try to paint him. I think you’re confusing him with Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Ford or one the “captains of industry”. If you’ve ever spent time in a rural area, you may have heard of a “coop”, or a “food” coop in the city. Imagine an economy where these are much more a norm than an exception. And please don’t rephrase terminology with a commu- prefix in an attempt to color what you hate red. Remember, communicate (as in prayer) and Holy Communion both begin with commu-, and that you too have a choice: God (Christianity) or mammon (economic -ism). If you trust God to provide manna, daily bread, from one day to the next, you may be surprised how independent of capitalism you really can be.

  12. paradosis says:

    59) Fr.J, I really wish you could refrain from trying to make me an ideologist, a “liberal lover” or whatever box it is you’re trying to put me in. I have not read any of Fr. Kishkovsky’s other work and know nothing else about him or his involvement with the NCC, so I am NOT DEFENDING him. I took what he wrote at face value as a sort of confirmation of what Jaroslav Pelikan said: Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism the dead faith of the living. I think that whenever we allow Christian faith to be compromised with some -ism, no one in particular, then we might say that we have now put our faith, at least in part, in that ideology, and have lessened our trust in God.

    I apologize for not answering your question, what is Orthodox Culture, as it’s not easy to do and may result in another long winded post, but I will try. I think that Orthodoxy is in crisis in the west because it has lost it’s identity. In the old world there were abundant Churches with sacred architecture filled with iconography, and prominently placed to remind people of God and of (spiritual) reality. They were reminded of death through Orthodox funeral custom that did not engage in embalming. Life was not desacralized like it is in the modern west. In villages, the Church might even be at the center, if not physically at least at the center of everyone’s life (you, your neighbors, friends, strangers). Everyone’s life revolved around the Feasts of the Church, not civic religious “holidays”. These cultures were evangelized from the grass roots and reared in Orthodoxy. America on the other hand is egalitarian, pluralistic, “liberal”, secular. In many respects America is the Neo-pagan Rome (see OCMC.org-Saving People in a Modern World: Neopagans), so I think somehow we need to think deductively, inductively and creatively, whatever, every way we can, using historical Orthodox Christianity as a starting point, pray and try to find our cultural context with the help of God.

    I think we are more like the early Christians than Mid Easterners, Greeks or Eastern Europeans. I do not think the early Christians were culturally Roman, or that the only thing that was distinctive about them was their worship. They lived together communally for one, and worshiped in a mausoleum (catacombs).

    We live in a culture that is predominantly neo-pagan oriented, without being persecuted per se. We need to use this time wisely, take advantage and prepare ourselves for a time when that may not be the case. We can do so by practicing a wholly unique and modern form of asceticism, not simply the abstenence from meat, wine, oil, etc. as of old, since we face a beast wholly unheard of in traditional Orthodox culture: consumerism. We can abstain from all kinds of things: debt, from upper and hyper mobility, excessive telecommunication and technology, etc.

    We can become more self sufficient, producers instead of consumers, live cooperatively, etc. This may become a forced reality in the day of anti-christ when no one will be allowed to buy or sell without accepting the mark of the beast. It is to our own discredit if we do not have or cannot see how we can live culturally different from the average American Joe in little to no other regard but that we show up at temple at the appointed time.

    I think we may have been warned of becoming entangled in economic -isms of “merchants” in Rev 3, 11, 15, 23 At any rate, I am open to trying to live cooperatively with other Orthodox Christians in a cohousing or similar situation. I may end up the owner of 50 acres, which is why I’m “entertaining” and maintaining LiveGivingSpring.INFO

    I strive to have sympathy for the poor like Chesterton. My dad grew up in the Great Depression and passed away suddenly this past Sept. I have been cleaning up all the stuff he saved as typical of his generation, see him and his ways in all his things, and miss him TERRIBLY. He grew up plowing with mules with my grandfather, loved to work outdoors, a great gardener. I remember him saying, I plant the seed, God does the rest. We have never been well off much less wealthy or rich, but neither are we envious. My dad always said no matter how much money anyone has it’s never enough, they always want more. He spoke from experience, but strove to be happy with what he was granted, and never lived beyond his means with a “champagne” taste on a “beer” pocketbook, as he would always say.

    I am interested in interpreting Orthodoxy into European, Hispanic, and African American cultural forms. This should be obvious in the content at LifeGivingSpring.INFO and StallFamily.NET I hope in some way this has answered your question.

  13. paradosis says:

    errata: that’s Rev chapter 18: 3, 11, 15 23

  14. Christopher says:

    note 60:

    What you call “force to virtue” I call “curb from excessive vice”.

    Right. How do you plan to “curb”? Point of the sword (i.e. governmental regulatory power)? I am all for conversion, just not forced conversion.

    Chesterton was not “snubbing” the Spanish peasants, but trying to protect them from a force they were ill prepared to defend themselves against and about which they were ignorant.

    Boloney. This sentence IS the definition of elitism. Those Spanish peasants had seen beautiful things before. They were quite aware of what it means to splurge on unnecessary things. This is a common human experience, even in poverty. External “protection” is of limited value in any case. Generally, it fails with adults, who find a way to their vice despite their neighbor.

    To turn this into a darkness in Chesterton is very uncharitable and judgemental of you.

    Stop being a bratty teenager. I am addressing ideas, not his character. If you can’t tell the difference, perhaps you should go away and grow up a bit. Come back in a year or three when you understand the difference.

    The spirit of capitalism is darwinian, competitive, and it’s god is mammon.

    Boloney. Look up the definition. It’s simply freedom of capital, freedom of economic association. You are pushing an “ism” that simply does not fit. True, freedom does allow the freedom of vice – but also of virtue.

    Remember, communicate (as in prayer) and Holy Communion both begin with commu-, and that you too have a choice: God (Christianity) or mammon (economic -ism). If you trust God to provide manna, daily bread, from one day to the next, you may be surprised how independent of capitalism you really can be.

    Your no prophet, and not a good preacher. You should stick with your day job…:)

  15. paradosis says:

    64) Your post is a bit emotive, to say the least, for someone who thinks that’s awful; or has a “nerve” been touched? I consider Chesterton a fellow Christian, but wonder about your loyalties. They seem to be placed somewhere else. You are not nearly as expressive of being “grown up” and “knowledgeable” of the world as you seem to imagine yourself to be. (BTW you’re is a contraction; your a possessive pronoun).

    The context of your latest put down is just another of your “swords”, one of the many things you use to lord it over others, conquer and divide rather than unite in diversity. No wonder you see yourself when you look at Chesterton, instead of who he really is. It’s called psychological projection and Orthodox Christianity wrote the book on its cure. You could avail yourself of it if you so desire.

    If you think that “free will” should be the arbiter of socio-economic relations, then you shouldn’t by a one-sided hypocrite and seek to interfere and “govern” people’s “moral” choices regarding their sexuality, marriage, children, etc. then turn around and leave them to fend for themselves in the marketplace. You don’t like the choices you see people making with those aspects of life, but then you turn around and leave them vulnerable to their passions so the “economy” will flourish, shrug your shoulders and say, they should’ve known better, sucker. The sucker is the one that sucks on others, not the on that is sucked. We’re living in America, remember, and Orthodox Christianity is not the “culture” here, so folks have no spiritual weaponry, much less controlling interest (capital) with which to fend off attack.

    Every Orthodox Christian is prophet, priest and king, but it seems what matters most to you is being king, your way. Met. John Zizioulas of Pergamon has a lot to say about our role as priest, but I expect you will dismiss ALL of that because you will “find” (judge) him guilty by nothing more than association with someone or something you hate. I find it hard to comprehend the “logic” in that way of “thinking”, especially in someone of such “high” intelligence and learning. I’m beginning to wonder if you aren’t just too “perfect” in your own mind even for Orthodoxy, as no one seems to measure up to your expectation unless they fall into lock step with your ideas.

    Chesterton was using “selling of hats to peasants” as a figure of speech, but you may be such an extreme literalist, that as soon as anyone seems to broach something that emotes your personal prejudices, that you interpret as an affront to your reality, you no longer listen, much less give them the benefit of the doubt. You certainly don’t seem to behave as if others have anything worthy of saying or sharing with you.

    I’m offering you some more information that is indicative to me of what Chesterton is referencing, but I “prophesy” that you will tear at its bones like a pit bull. Still I hope you prove me wrong.

    FYI, you can vote all you want, it’s your prerogative and civic duty, but it won’t amount to anything until there is real lobby reform. That won’t happen because the monied powers that be are not anywhere near as “christian”, altruistic or philanthropic as you would have them to be; and the military-industrial-congressional complex is a self-referencing “Versaille on the Potomac” to quote Chuck Spinney. The only way to “vote” in America in the digital age, is with money, with currency. “Get with” the socio-economic politico lingo, if you think American government is worthy of such deep abiding Christian faith. I happen to think one can be a loyal and law abiding citizen without marching indian file in your manner.

    And as far as my being “no prophet” goes; I “prophesied” you would insult my maturity, and sure enough you did, even without knowing my exact age for which you asked several times. So if you want to call me “no prophet” have at it. I certainly won’t insist on taking your “truth” from you, but would prefer that you stay in your “box”, shorten your leash, and give others the same freedom you take for yourself without ripping them to shreds.

    Agrarian Justice by Thomas Paine
    Seven Deadly Myths and Facts About Hunger
    Land Loss, Poverty and Hunger
    Center for Peasant Studies and Agrarian Reform
    Land Policy Center
    http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/115/ by Wendell Berry

  16. #61

    The spirit of capitalism is darwinian, competitive, and it’s god is mammon.

    I used to think and say things like this back when I had no experience with business and knew nothing about economics. Then I spent many years working with businesses of all shapes and sizes in many states and countries. I realized that something was wrong with my understanding and actually took the time to read books on economics for the first time. Everything I read from the defenders of free-market economics corroborated what I had observed with my own eyes. My conclusion:

    The spirit of free-market economics is cooperation.

  17. “The spirit of capitalism is darwinian, competitive, and it’s god is mammon.”

    Well, it is frequently competitive, and I have no doubt that many successfuly people are driven by a love of money and everything that material wealth offers (including comfort, a sense of security and luxuries).

    I’m not so sure all of this is necessarily a bad thing (although these things can lead people down a road of dishonesty and corruption). One person’s success can frequently benefit more than just themselves: consider the vast number of people who have maintained strong careers for over two decades thanks in large part to the innovations and even competitive drive of someone like Bill Gates (who has since then contributed much of that back through his Gates Foundation for charitable causes).

    In other words, one person’s utilization of capitalism to acquire for themselves does not necessarily mean it comes at the cost of others, and it often is to the benefit of a multitude of others.

  18. Christopher says:

    Note 65:

    So, how old are you?

  19. paradosis says:

    66) The spirit of free-market economics is cooperation.

    When money is involved it’s amazing what will be done “cooperatively” to increase “market share” and ability to “compete” for that share, or “offer” a “service” or “product” where none was before, and fine tune that “cooperation” to get “consumers” to lap it up to the max. potential.

    Thomas Paine – who wrote “Common Sense”, also wrote Agrarian Justice.

    Corporatism or Commonweal
    Archbishop Lazar Puhalo
    A clear and profound doctrine of commonweal permeates the Old Testament. It is made law in the book of Deuteronomy and constantly enjoined by the Holy Prophets. Jesus Christ reaffirms this “law of commonweal” with his great moral imperative, “love your neighbour as yourself.” Elevating it above its original statement in the book of Leviticus, Christ makes this MORAL IMPERATIVE (together with unconditional love of God) the very foundation and essence of the Law and the Prophets. The fulfillment of such a moral imperative certainly requires a direct encounter and interaction with culture and society. Unfortunately, this is an encounter that has been either abandoned, corporatized or reduced to outbursts of moralism by many Christian bodies….
    .

  20. paradosis says:

    68) I just finished Kindergarten where I learned everything I need to know!

  21. Christopher says:

    Tom says:

    he spirit of capitalism is darwinian, competitive, and it’s god is mammon.

    I used to think and say things like this back when I had no experience with business and knew nothing about economics.

    Not only that, it is an erroneous use of “darwinian”. Darwin would be shocked, just shocked I tell you, to learn he has been appropriated in this way…;)

  22. Christopher says:

    Note 70:

    Give it up, I won’t click on any of your links – and neither should anyone else. You have come here with an ‘ill will’. You through around moral explicative and judgments like you have been storing them in your hip pocket, and refuse to engage ideas. You hide behind a pseudonym, asking questions but answering none. Your all about moral posturing, which is part and parcel of the “religious left”.

    It’s too bad, I would like to have really talked to a worthy representative of the “agrarian” side of the House…

  23. Christopher says:

    James says:

    In other words, one person’s utilization of capitalism to acquire for themselves does not necessarily mean it comes at the cost of others, and it often is to the benefit of a multitude of others.

  24. Christopher says:

    continuing note 73:

    This is exactly right James. Economics is not a “zero-sum” game, where the “pie” is only so big, and everyone is in a struggle to get a bigger piece at the expense of their neighbor. Economics, our common economic life together, is an open ended “game”, where the wealth “produced” does not eat into the wealth of another, but instead makes the whole pie bigger and bigger. This is why the economy “grows”, and why efficiency (say, in the utilization of an energy source – or the efficiency in business/personal accounting gained from the PC and Bill Gates OS) makes everyone’s piece of the pie bigger.

    This is not only basic economics, but basic “life”. Those that reduce our economic life together to a zero sum game do so from a very simplistic, and erroneous, view. Not surprisingly, they usually propose a solution based on the same view – some “ism” that is all about taking pie from one person and giving it to another. They usually call this “charity”. Problem is, Charity has already seen fit to fix the problem – life is not a zero sum game. For that, we can Thank God…

  25. paradosis says:

    72) Give it up, I won’t click on any of your links

    Of course not, your ill will won’t let you open yourself to anything but your own “zero sum” closed thinking so you end up stuck in your own stink. Everyone’s “piece of the pie grows”? That’s a joke. You make the pie sound like humans have the ability to create ex nihilo. That is your error.

    And by all means I will give up on you.
    Undoubtedly I touched another nerve, the one that didn’t graduate from Kindergarten. In your anger and hatred all you can do is label me “left” as usual. If “moral posturing” is an indicator of the religious “left”, then you better have a look at yourself and your chosen brethren in the “right” in the mirror. If ever there was an “ill” wind, it comes from your blow hard.

    Not only have I engaged many ideas, I’ve introduced many that are barely if at all represented here, and have answered plenty of questions, just not the one and only irrelevant one you pester, my age. You have no interest in conversing with any agrarian because you wont find one worthy with your attitude. Furthermore, I don’t consider myself one. If you were interested in such, you would have made use of the link I provided to Thomas Paine, and would have bothered to spell “agrarian” correctly. Even though you’re (not your) spelling needs work, I don’t think it was a typo you threw (not through, or throw) out.

    Bill Gates doesn’t even believe your myth. If he did, he wouldn’t have said that digital technology hasn’t REALLY “changed” the world. That’s why on earth he’s spending his “profits” on other things.

  26. Christopher agrees with one of my posts? I hope this is not an omen of an impending apocalypse! LOL

  27. Christopher says:

    JamesK

    em>Christopher agrees with one of my posts? I hope this is not an omen of an impending apocalypse! LOL

    :) I’m looking out the window now…no horseman yet…I will let you know :)

  28. Christopher says:

    Paradosis says:

    Everyone’s “piece of the pie grows”? That’s a joke. You make the pie sound like humans have the ability to create ex nihilo. That is your error.

    LOL! Yes, we are created in the Image and Likeness – we are creators!! Have you read the Fathers? We of course do not create ex nihilo, but we create out of both the nature, the creation which God has given us to create from, and in a mysterious way along with the Spirit of God, like when we really do Love one another, or when we reflect the beauty of the Infinite (say in a painting) we are “co-creators” as the Fathers would say. This is one of the many things that makes us human – this is basic Christian Anthropology. This is no joke…

    The rest of you post is the usual moral vindictive…

  29. paradosis says:

    78) This is one of the many things that makes us human – this is basic Christian Anthropology. This is no joke…

    And your example is that of the Saints who were unmercenaries, not businessmen. You make statements that can be true, but when qualified can also be seen as not so perfect as first presented. I don’t demonize business per se, but there are prevalent business practices that do not fit your shining economic image in which you seem to put your faith.

    What you call “moral vindictive”, I call defending oneself.
    If you don’t want it served to you, then sheath your sword and stop dishing it out.

    BTW – I haven’t seen your personal profile, age, etc., not that I care.

  30. Michael Bauman says:

    Capitalism is the only economic system that is not “zero-sum” in nature. It is one of the key elements that distinguishes capitalism from every other economic approach. All other things being equal, two capitalisitc coununtries will not often go to war against each other, there is far too much to loose economically.

    Of course, when ethnic hatred, religious animosity or other such divisions intrude, problems crop up. Historically, free commerce has fostered tolerance in the long run. Under capitalism, greed frequently self-destructs.

    Freedom is a horrible thing. It requires the acceptance of imperfection and often tragedy, but it is God’s way. He allows us to sow what we will and to reap what we sow and loves us through it all. That is why His judgement is perfect. Most of us don’t like God because of that. We want him to “twang his magic twangger” and make everything right. We lost the opportunity to live without sin when we choose to believe the devil’s lies.

    paradosis, what did the Incarnation accomplish? What does the Feast of the Transfiguration we just celebrated mean in the our life in this world?

    We are not all called to be celibate monks, we are all called to community in Jesus Christ to share of what we produce with one another and those in need. How are we to do that, if we produce nothing?

  31. paradosis –

    JamesK’s post #67 was very well put. I don’t know whether or not he has read about free-market economics, but he has grasped some essential truths.

    My suggestion to you is that you set aside what seems to be a deep-seated resentment against rich people and read one or two good expositions of free-market economics. You might change your mind like I did.

    I spent a lot of time over the course of 3 years working with shoe companies at their plants in China. These plants are the supposed icons of capitalistic exploitation. When the workers there found out that “human rights activists” were on site surreptiously auditing the plant conditions they would chase them out, heaving shoes at them to hasten their flight.

    After seeing such things first hand it’s hard to take the anti-globalist stuff seriously. Are there problems with free-market driven globalization? Sure. Nothing is perfect. But when the alternative is bone-grinding poverty it’s an easy choice. It’s your relative comfort that allows you the luxury of railing against “exploitation”.

  32. paradosis says:

    80) The Incarnation joined human nature to divine nature, so that human nature could descend to the depths of Hades and be brought up out of it by the power of Divine nature to which it had been joined in Christ, thereby overcoming Death in humanity in Christ which until then held All Creation captive. The Transfiguration shows that the condition of the world changed with the coming of the Messiah, and shows humanity its potential for which it was created, its hope while it travels through the Valley of the Shadow of Death. It also points to the Transfiguration of All Creation that “groans” awaiting “the release of the sons of God”.

    We are not all called to be celibate monks, we are all called to community in Jesus Christ to share of what we produce with one another and those in need. How are we to do that, if we produce nothing?

    I’m sorry, I don’t see the relation of these questions to anything I’ve had to say. You must have me confused with someone else; I never advocated for the abolition of “production”, industrial or otherwise, or said everyone had to be a monk and produce nothing. There are many monks who are productive, in many ways depending on what you mean by ‘productive’ (financially, I presume).
    I answered Fr.J (post 62)
    We can become more self sufficient, producers instead of consumers, live cooperatively, etc.
    When I think of economic “freedom”, I think about how we can eat out, eat processed food, or food cooked from scratch. How we can even grow our own food, wholly or in part.

    My folks and I have for years; me not as many as they, and now my Dad can no longer, so it’s Mom and I; she’s 80 with 2 knee replacements. (See slide show at StallFamily.NET, a memorial to my Dad; click on oval image lower right.) Growing up, my mom sewed all her own and my sister’s clothing. She even made shirts for me at my request when I went off to university. I bought all my own clothes in high school with money I made mowing lawns for $3 a lawn.

    Take stock of what you produce. Probably you trade your “time” and energy for a paycheck, that if it’s big enough allows you to hire others to do for you what you could do for yourself if you were independent of “economics”, could use your time for other things, and lived modestly. Most likely, you consume more than you actually produce and could not produce everything you consume on your own. If you own an average house today, most likely it’s 3 times the size of the average house from the 50’s, you may have about the same times as many clothes, “things”, etc. In other words, you’re “buying into” the system that makes you think you’re a king in a castle when in fact you may be more of a serf than ever. It’s been shown that the peasantry was better off before the Industrial Revolution, and it took until the 19th century for the standard of living of the peasantry to return to what it once was. Modern “values” are utilitarian. Local “economy” is destroyed when the global economy is given precedence over it; and “mobility” is valued over rootedness in the earth. Everything comes with a “price”. (Picture modernity as Charlie Chaplin amidst all those cogwheels).

    And now some questions for you.
    What was the earth like before the Fall of mankind? After the Fall, what do you think God meant when he told Adam he now must till the earth to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow amidst thorns and thistles, and Eve that she must bear children amidst pain. If humanity hadn’t “fallen”, would we all have been birthed from a woman’s uterus? Did thorns and thistles exist before the Fall? What is the “Valley of the Shadow of Death”? What is the fate of that “Valley”?

    And most importantly, do you think you follow God’s mandate for mankind after the Fall, or are you “pictured” in Brueghel’s “Tower of Babel”?
    (Some say it’s a political cartoon of sorts, commentary on the “times” that then were achangin’, laying the foundation for our own times.)

    “If you’re really going to (be a) neighbor, you go to them when they need you, and when you need help you call. Two brothers who live up the creek and another friend and I have known each other pretty near always, and we exchange work all the time. We don’t KEEP BOOKS. I do all I can for them. They do all they can for me. And it’s a good thing. Who knows what the record is? I helped one of them put in his crop of tobacco last year. He said, “What do I owe you?” I said, “Nothing.” That’s CEREMONY. He wouldn’t want me to think that I hadn’t worked well enough to deserve to be paid, or that he wouldn’t be willing to pay me if I wanted him to. But when hog-killing time came I had two hogs to kill and he said, “I’ve fattened you a hog, you need three.” He knew I hadn’t had enough bacon the year before. I don’t know whether he overpaid me or I overpaid him or where it stands. And that’s the way I prefer to live. That means our work has ESCAPED FROM ECONOMICS and has value in an altogether DIFFERENT sense, and a much LARGER sense. Our work for each other is valuable beyond its PRACTICAL worth because there’s a deep strong bond of friendship and respect among us. It gives us pleasure to work together.”
    – Wendell Berry

  33. Michael Bauman says:

    paradosis,

    We cannot escape economics any more than we can escape politics. Economics is how we value and exchange “stuff”. Politics is how we order our existence with others in groups.

    The definition you give of the Incarnation is a good beginning but it is much more. It began the re-sanctification of the creation through us. That means that we are capable, by the grace of God, to live a sacramental life. Many live sacramentally to a degree, very few do so consistently. Nevertheless, the blessing of the fruits of the earth and our labor is part of that. But just remember that St. Paul instructed us not to judge what our brother eats, neither should we judge how our brothers and sisters work and the goods that each has.

    Let simplicity accompany you everywhere. Be especially simple in your faith, hope, and love, for God is not a complex Being, and our soul is also simple. The flesh hinders the simplicity of our soul when we gratify it; let meekness be its crown.

    Saint John of Kronstadt

    …the poor..”care not for wealth, and are superior to covetousness, are despisers of base gifts, and of a disposition free from the love of money, and who set no value upon the ostentatious display of riches”

    St. Cyril of Alexandria commenting on Luke 6:20,
    “Blessed are the poor, for yours is the Kingdom of Heaven.”

    Living a sacramentally simply life without attachment to the world is the goal of all Christians. But no one has the authority to mandate what that means in each person except Christ alone . Romans Chapter 1 explains quite clearly what stands in our way.

    It is my own sinfulness, covetousness and desire. I reap in my body and my soul what I have sown and face the consequences of my rebellion. Obedience given in submission to His love is required, but cannot be forced or coerced or obedience turns into slavery.

    Government is instituted among us to restrain where necessary, the worst of our behavior, and allow for freedom. Nothing more. The Preamble to the U.S Constitution says it quite well.

    We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and estabish this Constitution of the United States of America.

    The administration of the ideas gets difficult.

    We cannot rely on government to do what we refuse to do. Government is simply a reflection of us. Free and just governments rule over a free and just people. Tryannical governments rule over people who reject freedom and justice. As we become more hedonistic and reject any authority outside our own minds, the more likely it becomes that a tryannical form of government will arise.

  34. paradosis says:

    82) We cannot escape economics any more than we can escape politics. Economics is how we value and exchange “stuff”. Politics is how we order our existence with others in groups.

    Yes economics and politics are “necessary evils”. No one’s “judging” anything but the modern day “systems”.

    We cannot escape economics COMPLETELY, but we can create our own system of economics locally that orders the way we interact with each other, and affects society at large as much if not more by what we ABSTAIN from as by what we produce. We can limit our expectations of government by living in a way that limits our involvement with it, thereby minimizing it in our own lives whether politically the government is “shrunken” or not. We don’t have to passively expect government to “handle” economics for us, or march lockstep to the tune of Wall Street’s drummer. Neither must we accept that the current way always was, or is the best that can possibly be. Comparing today to “the way things were” over time helps to put today in perspective.

    St. Paul also told us to be wise as serpents and innocent as lambs.
    He didn’t tell us to go out and build another tower of babel, then justify our actions politically.

    Yes, the jury’s still out on how Christians can best “live in the world without being of the world”. Historically, that’s been split between those who choose to embed themselves in the world while not living for it, and those who have separated themselves more so from it to do the same (and I’m not necessarily making a distinction between monastics and laity). You’re as free to choose that as anyone else. Just see to it that you don’t “mandate” your way for anyone else either. If you meet anyone interested in living cooperatively, please send them my way.

    If your reply is what you intended all along, then you could have just spoken your mind to begin with without the questions. I asked some of you, got no answer, and seem to remember being upbraided by you when you thought I’d treated you that way. Besides the fact, that the issue at large began over the labelling of things the way one wants to see them, not listening or embracing what someone else thinks, feels, or experiences, limiting their “freedom” in other words by shutting them out, implying or telling them they’re “wrong” without attempting to understand their point of view, how or why they have come to hold it.

    I’ve been familiar with nihilism, materialism, utopianism, and many other -isms and strive to stay free from entanglement with them. I appreciate the fact that you try to do the same. If you genuinely want the “liberality” of faith that you describe, it’s equally important that you extend that to others, especially those with whom you disagree. Labeling, telling them what they are, think, etc., “outing” them for the “principled man-haters” that you may think they are will not build a relationship with them that might even stand the chance of them possibly coming to see things your way. Humility includes acknowledging that one’s understanding of the conservative-liberal debate may not be exactly as it appears in one’s own mind.

  35. Christopher says:

    Paradosis mentions Wendell Berry. Can’t say I have too much respect for the man. He sits in his valley in Kentucky preaching passivism (contra Christianity) while others protect him, even with their lives. He does not know what sustains him…

  36. Christopher says:

    Paradosis says:

    I’m sorry, I don’t see the relation of these questions to anything I’ve had to say. You must have me confused with someone else; I never advocated for the abolition of “production”

    Baloney. You wade into this blog with both barrels firing about “capitalism” and the rest. IF you are not a bratty teenager, you sure act like one…

    When are you going to identify yourself, and how old you are?

  37. Christopher says:

    Paradosis quotes Wendal Berry saying:

    That means our work has ESCAPED FROM ECONOMICS and has value in an altogether DIFFERENT sense, and a much LARGER sense. Our work for each other is valuable beyond its PRACTICAL worth because there’s a deep strong bond of friendship and respect among us. It gives us pleasure to work together

    I get the same out of my work. Wendell here is being elitist. He thinks he escapes economics – he has not, he’s just done a good job of defining it! His thinking is detached from reality…

  38. Christopher says:

    “paradosis” says:

    that the issue at large began over the labelling of things the way one wants to see them, not listening or embracing what someone else thinks, feels, or experiences, limiting their “freedom” in other words by shutting them out, implying or telling them they’re “wrong” without attempting to understand their point of view

    Exactly, which began with your rambling, unfocused, moralizing (without any real substance) posts. The economic tangent started with your strange, unfocused, ramblings against “capitalism”.

    Take Fr. Jacobse advice and try to stick with a point or two.

    If you genuinely want the “liberality” of faith that you describe, it’s equally important that you extend that to others, especially those with whom you disagree. Labeling, telling them what they are, think, etc., “outing” them for the “principled man-haters” that you may think they are will not build a relationship with them that might even stand the chance of them possibly coming to see things your way. Humility includes acknowledging that one’s understanding of the conservative-liberal debate may not be exactly as it appears in one’s own mind.

    What? People really truly are “principled man-haters”. People really truly are liberals, conservatives, Christians, pagans, men, women, etc. This is where you really sound like a bratty teenager. All of us adults understand the difference between a philosophy and a person, a “label” and a human being. This site is about ideas, Orthodoxy, and it’s relation to the culture. Labels are useful tools. Please stick with the articles and the blog discussions – your sophomoric attempts at preaching (e.g. Humility includes acknowledging…) is at best irrelevant, usually it’s just plain silly…

    p.s. How old are you?

  39. paradosis says:

    85-88)

  40. The great irony here is that paradosis is engaged in discussion on the internet. His computer only exists because of an immense chain of production, starting with mined metals, extracted petroleum, refined metals, refined plastics, composites of metals and plastics, etc. Each of these, in turn exists only because there are plants filled with specialized machinery that effect each step of production, each piece of machinery being built at yet another plant and depending on an immensity of components, each of these produced at still other plants.

    Are the folks doing this all work dehumanized, or depraved? From my observations over 25 years I have to say no. Some are Christians, some are athiests, some are depressed, some are perpetually buoyant. Can the Christians in these factories be good Christians? Sure, why not? I think Wendell Berry and crew are simply mistaking their aesthetic preferences for morality.

  41. Michael Bauman says:

    paradosis, There is no such thing as a necessary evil for Christians because, due to the Incarnation, everything that is necessary in our lives can be sanctified and is therefore not evil. Necessary evils are the sanctuary for those who do not wish to confront what it takes to really live a Christian life in a fallen world. Economics and politics are an integral part of living in community in a material world. The fact that you call them “necessary evils” indicates to me that you have not begun to appreciate the profound effect of the Incarnation.

    As St. Demetrios of Thesolonika and many other saints show, even the use of the sword can be sanctified so certainly economic and political activity can be.

    I missed your questions in the midst of all the other words. Please restate them.

    I ask questions because they are generally a better way to get a non-confrontational conversation going and to do what I can to really understand what the other person is saying. Bombast is fun to do, but usually boring and unedifying for others. As far as stating what I really believe, I don’t have too much difficulty with that, its the living part that’s hard.

    You’re 85 to 88 years old?

    “God is with us!” we proclaim in Matins. But His manifestation will only be full and complete when we live and act in the mind of Christ the Crucified – who emptied Himself and took on the form of a servant. Others will believe in Christ when they see his crucifixion displayed in the lives of his followers. Until they see his crucifixion displayed in His followers, they have not yet heard the Gospel.

    Fr. Stephen Freeman Christ Crucified

    There is no political ideology, dogma, or philosophy that adds anything to the life of a Christian whether it is labled “liberal” or “conservative”. To allow them to determine our actions in this world is dangerous especially when we allow them to divide us from our brothers. They should be examined in the shadow of the Cross not the other way around.

  42. paradosis says:

    90) I think Wendell Berry and crew are simply mistaking their aesthetic preferences for morality.

    Wendell Berry addresses the issues of land, industrialization, property ownership, people, food supply and much more.

    Tom C
    The Agrarian Standard
    Reading Comprehension F

  43. Note 90, I also bet paradosis holds his money in a bank that, gasp, pays him interest for use of his money. He must have called and demanded that they stop their capitalistic ways and give the earned interest to the poor.

    If he’s got any type of retirement or pension account he again invests in the stock of capitalist corporations and enjoys the benefits of the risks these companies take to insure a return greater than the rate of inflation and provide some cushion for his retirement. Oh the horror of capitalism and freedom! No, let’s follow the “worker utopia” model created and blessed by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ceausescu, Castro, Mugabe, Chavez, etc. etc. that brought and continues to bring us the joys of mass murder, suffering, torture, imprisonment, and the starvation of tens of millions of people. That’s the solution! Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

  44. paradosis says:

    91)
    I agree questions are a great way to open up communication. Christopher seems to think that you are a Troll and bait people with them, but you seem to me to have more character than that.

    Questions lost can be found in 82) but never mind.
    I’m choosing to live “in the world” differently; choosing to shut off my senses by simplifying and living a rural life so I can better remember God and Death and work on kenosis.

    See Christ and CultureProf. Constantine Scouteris, University of Athens
    The negative so to speak attitude towards culture is based on the argument that civilization is not the final goal of human destiny. Culture is composed by various values which were produced during the course of human history. However, from a Christian point of view, cultural achievements are not the ultimate values of life; they are even often not necessary presuppositions for salvation. One can even argue that it can be perhaps easier a to be saved, given that he is free from the yoke of civilization and consequently has the possibility for a clear and direct vision of the Christian truth. The accumulations are often obstacles, not allowing the human person to reach the of the Gospel. It is beyond doubt that (1 Cor 3: 19-20).

    Christianity and Culture Fr. George Florovsky

    “Necessary evils” is a figure of speech; so you have misread me, so your deductions regarding my understanding of the Incarnation are false.

    Michael Bauman
    English Grammar/Idioms D+

    85-88?????
    LLLLLLLLOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
    Yes, I was born 5-8 years before my mother was conceived,
    proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am most certainly prophetic!!!!

    Michael Bauman
    Reading Comprehension C- (for making me laugh!)

  45. #92

    Wendell Berry addresses the issues of land, industrialization, property ownership, people, food supply and much more.

    Nice to see that Mr. Berry addresses the issue of, um, people.

  46. paradosis says:

    95) You would know that had you actually read any of his work before assasinating his character.

  47. Let’s make this simple for paradosis to understand. There are 3 and only 3 ways for anyone in life to have/obtain value (monetary or economic) or acquire any asset to be able to live or sustain oneself or one’s family:

    (1) you ethically earn it (by working and providing value to your employer, or risking it in a venture to provide new value to others via a service or product) = Ethical Capitalism

    (2) you steal it from others or someone else (individual, institution, or government) steals it on your behalf = Criminals, Communism, Socialism, Fascism, American government (federal, state and local), Robin Hood, the Sopranos, the Mafia, etc..

    (3) someone voluntarily gives it to you = Charity (Christian or otherwise) NOTE however, in order for someone (individual, government, church, institution, etc..) to have the money/asset to give it to you they also must attain it via #1 or #2

    Notice that the only fair, ethical, and voluntary model that is based fully on freedom and the greatest respect for the individual is #1. (NOTE: I did not include unethical, lying, criminal, or abusive individuals, executives, and companies that do not practice ethical capitalism.)

  48. paradosis says:

    93) Banescu, I really like the article you wrote on business ethics. God’s blessing on your work in that regard and may He have tremendous effect on the business community through it.

    I am so deeply grateful, that I am happy to be the target of your off target communist ridicule. It has brought back a visual memory of my dearly departed Dad telling the sacker at the grocery store on whom everyone picked, “l got picked on too, but I knew that if they’re picking on me then they’re not picking on someone else”. The anniversary of his repose is Sept 25, if you’d like to help me pray for him. He was a WWII vet. You may have found him entertaining as well.

  49. Christopher says:

    Perhaps we should give Mr. “paradosis” a break. To him, to disagree is to “assassinate someone’s character”. It must be very difficult to believe such things, as you could not disagree on anything (say, what color to paint the kids bedroom this year) without assassinating a character or two. To add insult to injury, as note 97 puts it, he is the quintessential underdog – the proverbial pimply faced kid sacking the caviar and fine French wine of those greedy “Capitalists”. He puts their groceries into the cavernous trunk of their Mercedes Benz, and all they do is throw him a look that says “I hope my daughter does not bring you home one day” when all he was looking for was a quarter…Gosh, I am about all teared up just thinking about it …:) :) :) ;)

    In all seriousness, I would have really liked to meet your father – perhaps one “day”, God willing, I will. I LOVE talking to WWII vets. In my last parish we had an ace of the pacific theater. It bores my wife, but I can talk to these guys all day. May his memory be Eternal!!

  50. paradosis says:

    97) Thanks for the instruction in economics 1.
    BTW – My dad was the one who taught me everything I know about finances. At 13 I kept a ledger of my income ($3 per lawn mowed) and expenses. I have lived my life debt free, always paying off my cc charges every month. My dad did the same, never owning a credit card, dying at age 84. His annual income topped at $30K. He had a pension from the major oil corporation he worked that he worked at for 35 years that amounted to $700 per month for the 26 years he was able to draw it. It stopped when he died. He was able to send my sister and I to university, and build a retirement home for he and my mom. I’m looking after her now that he’s gone. She is a career housewife and doesn’t drive. He accomplished all this not because he was ethical and did not stand for foolishness.
    So again thanks for the instruction.
    I’ve had the best teacher money couldn’t buy.