COPPOCC

"COPPOCC?!" I hear you cry.
Yes. COPPOCC.

One of the greatest of the teachers I have been blessed with was a history-teacher called John Matusiak. If there is one thing that every student of his will never forget, even if they forget all the history he taught them, it is COPPOCC. This is a mnemonic used in evaluating sources critically.

CONTENT
OWN KNOWLEDGE
PROVENANCE
PURPOSE
OMISSIONS, SIGNIFICANT
CONTEXT
CROSS-REFERENCE

Now, if everybody, when they read or heard what passes for news among us, would consider this list, or at least the first six points on it, then there might be some clarity of thought in our society. What does it say? What do I know? Who wrote it? Why was it written? What does it not say? What is its context? What does another source say?
If people asked themselves, and answered for themselves, these simple questions, then we would know that people had begun to think for themselves at last, and that they might be a little nearer to the truth. Truth is the object of the intellect. You have an intellect in order to know the truth. You know that, don't you?

I am frustrated and disgusted by the treatment of the Holy Catholic Church by the media. I use the phrase "the media" in the sense of the mainstream media, such as The New York Slimes and the British Fraudcasting Corporation.

The accusations against Father Murphy are evidently true; the accusations made against the Pope, when he was Card. Ratzinger, are false. This latter story, propagated by the New York Times, and by, I think, every non-Catholic major disseminator of news throughout the entire world, is false, as Fr de Souza points out. All I shall do here is link the Gentle Reader to it:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDkxYmUzMTQ1YWUyMzRkMzg4Y2RiN2UyOWIzNDVkNDM=

http://blog.archny.org/?p=589

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncregister.com%2Fblog%2Fcardinal%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2BNCRegisterDailyBlog%2B%252540The%2BDaily%2BRegister%252541%23When%3A14%3A59%3A09Z&h=4b5ff576b4c70aac1d0057dcf497b93c

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100032121/the-pope-the-judge-the-paedophile-priest-and-the-new-york-times/



The simple fact is that the hatred the media have for Catholicism is so strong that if you assert its true extent, nobody not Catholic will believe you; for this hatred would be simply incredible, were it not true. Nevertheless, it is a fact.

All I can do is quote the words of Marshall McLuhan:

The modern media are engaged in a Luciferian conspiracy against the truth.

Forgive my not blogging yesterday. I was asked earlier whether swearing was a sin. I am taking the word swearing in this sense to be equivalent to verbia turpia; this is what St Alphonsus has to say.



426. - "8. Verba turpia, lectio obscœnorum, spectatio

comœdiarum turpium, cantiones inhonestæ, gestus litteræ,

et dona amatoria, si tantùm fiunt ex curiositate, vel

vano solatio, non sunt mortalia; secùs tamen, si fiant,

vel animo inhonesto, sive venereo, vel cum periculo ruinæ

spiritualis sui, vel aliorum. Sanch. d. 46.

q. 3. Fill. t. 30. c. 10. q.

3."
Quær. 1. an sit peccatum mortale verba turpia proferre?

Quidquid in hoc puncto diverè DD. sentiant, dicendum:
I. de se non esse malum verba turpia proferre, aut

audire (idem enim dicitur de proferente, quod de

audiente); sed hoc pendet ex bono, vel malo fine, quo

verba proferuntur. Ita Sanch. de matr. l. 9.

d. 46. n. 34.
Dicendum II. quòd loqui turpia ob vanum solatium, sive

jocum, de se non est mortale. Ita cum Bus. hic,

et S. Antonin. p. 2. tit. 3. c. 1. §.

8. ac Sanch. n. 35. Cum. S. Antonin. Nav. etc.

Tamb. c. 8. §. 4. n. 2. nisi audientes sint

ita debiles spiritu, ut scandalum patiantur, ut Sanch.

n. 36. cum Nav. etc. aut, nisi verba sint

nimis lasciva, ut addunt Salm. tr. 26. c.

3. punct. 1. n. 19. Hinc notant num.

20. cum Dicast., dicteria turpia, quæ

proferuntur à messoribus, vindemiatoribus, et mulionibus,

non esse mortalia, quia ludricè dicuntur, et audiuntur.

Ita etiam loquitur s. Anton. l. c. dicens : Ubi

talia verba turpia dicuntur ex quadam levitate ob

solatium, quamvis de se non sint mortalia,...tamen potest

esse mortale ratione scandali, ut, cùm audientes sint

debiles spiritu, ut verba essent multùm lasciva. Idem

dicendum de facientibus, vel cantantibus cantilenas

plenas lasciviis. Sic etiam dicunt cum Bus.

Sanch. n. 44. Tam. §. 5. num. 1. et

Spor. de matr. n. 695. de se esse tantùm veniale

legere libros turpes ex curiositate, sine turpi

delectatione, vel ejus proximo periculo (Sed sedulò

satagant confessarii, ut hoc prohibeant, quantùm valent,

juvenibus, qui ex hujusmodi lectionibus universè magnam

animæ ruinam hauriunt). Et idem dicendum de audiente

prædicta verba ob vanum solatium, ut Sanch. n. 38.

cum Caj. Rectè autem advertit S. Antonin. l.

c. quòd audiens turpia cum delectatione

deliberata illius turpitudinis, non videtur posse

sxcusari à mortali, sicut qui morosè delectatur in

turpi cogitatione, nisi fortè hæc forent inter

conjuges.
Dicendum III. cum eodem Sanch. n. 39. esse

sine dubio mortale dicere turpia ob delectationem, captam

ex cogitatione ipsarum rerum turpium, vel cum periculo

talis delectationis, ut rectè addit Tamb. l. c.

sive cum periculo gravis scandali, quod frequenter adest,

cùm talia proferuntur coram juvenibus vel puellis, ut

benè advertit Elbel n. 194. Hinc tenent Salm.

cit. n. 19. non excusari à peccato gravi, qui nominat

pudenda, aut modum copulandi, maximè coram

adolescentibus et mulieribus juvenibus honestis.

Nominare autem putenda sui proprii sexûs, coram aliis

sexûs ejusdem, puto, communiter loquendo, non esse grave.
Mortaliter etiam utique peccant, qui ob jactantiam

narrant sua turpia peccata: et tunc peccant non solùm

peccato scandali propter audientes, sed facillimè etiam

peccato complacentiæ de ipsis peccatis, ut rectè dicunt

Salm. cum Dic. ibid. n. 21. Et ideò in

confessione explicare debent speciem peccati, de quo se

jactârunt. Colloqui autem honestè extraneis, de se non

est nisi veniale; sed ratione periculi, maximè in

conversatione diuturna, potest esse grave, ut diximus

n. 422. in fin. cum Salm. loc. cit. n.

22. Ronc. c. 1. reg. 2. in praxi.

I have read A Shropshire Lad and most of Moore's Irish Melodies. To compare these is obviously like comparing apples with oranges; but I prefer Moore. Housman is rather bleak and cynical sometimes - one gets the impression that the poet was very unhappy. A Shropshire Lad seems to be without hope.
Moore, on the other hand, is full of spirit; I would much rather reread Moore than Housman, though both are good in their own ways.

I went to the doctor's this morning and acquired some more happy pills. I have also bought some books, all to do with music; one of them, indeed, has pages from The Musical Times of 1938 inside it - the book Maurice Ravel, which has the great misfortune of being written by a Dutchman; but nobody is perfect, not even I.
I am spending perhaps not altogether ordinate amounts of time poring over my glorious English-to-Latin dictionary. Its fullness is wonderful. Here is an extract from it:

fives (the game): pila (applicable to any ball game) : V. BALL.
fix : I. To make fast secure :
1. fīgo, xi, xum, 3 (most gen. term): the arms which had been f.'d upon the walls, arma quae fixa in parietibus fuerant, Cic. 2. destĭno, 1 (strictly, to f. down, as to the ground): Vitr.: v. TO FIX DOWN. II. To appoint, settle: 1. stătuo, i, ūtum, 3: to f. time and place for an interview, tempus locumque colloquio s., Liv. : v. TO APPOINT, DETERMINE. 2. constĭtuo, 3 (esp. when an appointment between parties is to be expressed): to f. a more advanced age for the consulate, grandiorem aetatem ad consulatem c., Cic.
3. condīco, xi, ctum, 3 (to make an appointment): Just. 4. praestītuo, i, ūtum, 3 (beforehand) : to f. beforehand how long we should speak, tempus quamdiu diceremus pr., Cic. 5. destĭno, 1 (definitively, decisively): to f. the hour of death (of a condemned person), horam mortis d., Cic. 6. (in pass.: to be f.'d or agreed upon) convĕnio, vēni, ventum, 4: that signal had been f.'d upon, id convenerat signum, Liv.
fix down: 1. dēfīgo, 3 : Caes.
2. destĭno, 1 (at some given point): Caes.
___ in, on, or upon : 1. infīgo, 3 (with acc. and prep.; also acc. and dat.): he f.'d his sword in the enemy's bosom, gladium hosti in pectus infixit, Cic. Fig: to teach something and fix it in the mind, docere aliquid et inf. angimis, Quint. 2. (in pass., and fig.) insĭdeo, sēdi, sessum, 2 (to become settled: usu. with in and abl.): the speech f.'d itself in the mind, insedit in animo oratio, Cic. 3. ĭnhaereo

Thus you can see the limit of my endurance for copying things out of dictionaries.

Anyway, I hope that all goes well with you, and I shall perhaps write at more length on the morrow.

It has just occurred to me that I may well not have time to blog later, so I shall blog now.
I went to Mass this morning, it being the Feast of the Annunciation; Mass was said by our dearly beloved priest, Fr Arthur Barrow, in the school; year 3 were there, for they are preparing for their first Communion. We are very blessed to have Father Arthur.
This evening I have listened to some 78s on the gramophone I acquired a couple of years ago.
I shall also be going out to hear my father sing at his rehearsal of the Mendelssohn.

I would regale you with more, but tempus urget.

More Imbecility in The Times

The Times has once more surpassed itself in its own abyss of anti-Catholicism. Today there is an article on the Pastoral Letter, entitled "Call the police - that's what Pope Benedict should have said;" which is remarkably stupid even for a headline. The article is so moronic that it is not worth commenting on. It is on p. 19, I think; it is by Ken MacDonald; and if the reader really wants to read it, he can find out for himself. Quite apart from the discussions of abuse, and the "complicity of the Vatican," and all the rest of it, why does MacDonald make an absurd assertion that the Letter includes a "swipe at Pope John XXIII's Second Vatican Council"? The Pope said that its instructions were "difficult to implement." That is a swipe at the Council? Sorry, at Pope John XXIII's Second Vatican Council, I should have said, in case I confused it with somebody else's Second Vatican Council. Or in case I were writing for a readership ignorant of what the Second Vatican Council was. Such, I would suggest, as much of the readership of The Times.
The imbecility of people who write comments on things on the Internet never ceases to depress me.
But that such depraved ravings are printed in The Times is most depressing; for The Times is of all newspapers the most representative of what Cobbett called "THE THING," or, as we call it, "the Establishment."