Aliens in This World

Rosary and Vampire/Rosario to Vampire is a fairly bizarre little anime that came out in 2008. It did well enough that a second season has been announced, and apparently it’s based on a reasonably popular manga.

The premise of manga and anime is pretty simple. An ordinary Japanese boy has failed to pass the admission tests for any of the good high schools in town. So when his father (by chance?) obtains an admissions packet for a high school he’s never heard of, he doesn’t ask too many questions.

But it turns out that, as fate assigned Adam Lyon to an animal school, chance has sent Tsukune to Monster Academy, a school where monsters (yokai) learn human etiquette and how to pass for human by going to school in human form. And that cute girl Mocha he just met, who wears the big Goth necklace? She’s a vampire, and that “rosary”, as she calls it, is all that keeps her in human form. She chose to wear the rosary, because only through the power of the cross could she be freed from vampiric power and bloodlust enough to go to school, learn, and make friends.

Of course, then we meet Mocha without the rosary. There’s apparently a whole long storyline about these two opposing versions of Mocha, which one is the real her, and whether Tsukune can come to see the Mocha he loves in them both.

You can see that a series like this could be lots of fun and a good think piece, too, with a nice blend of horror adventure to keep it from being too fluffy. But the manga apparently was focused on making it a fluffy harem comedy full of monster girls all mysteriously falling in love with Tsukune, along with some suggestive high school situations and action plots. Unfortunately, the anime producers decided that they needed lots of panty shots and gratuitous flesh, so I can’t really recommend it even as fluff.

I really wish anime companies would make more of the tasteful anime they can do if they try. They are such bottomfeeders. Sigh.

Btw, the “rosary” really isn’t one. Mocha wears a big leather choker around her neck, with a cross — not a crucifix — attached in front and rosary beads along the back. Mocha can’t remove the cross, since it seals her vampire form, but Tsukune can. Maybe they were afraid a real rosary would look too much like Buddhist beads?

Another amusing fact: Just as in the Tanya Grotter series, Medusa is on staff at Monster Academy. This version of Medusa likes creating chaos and destruction, however. Art teachers. Always the radicals on staff.

I was #29 on WordPress’ growing blogs list, yesterday, thanks to St. Augustine and Nancy Pelosi.

The last time I made a jump like this on the podcast, was when I posted the Life of St. Martin right before Martinmas, and all the Germans came to visit. The last time I made a jump like this on this blog, it was thanks to Amy Welborn.

So… I guess I need to spend more time posting about male saints and female professional speakers.

(grin, duck and run)

The local Republicans called me and told me I could get tickets. But me, I didn’t want to go. I took a personal day to do library research instead. And not at Wright State.

(Sorry. I’m a nerd without a car. It really was too much trouble to try and get tickets. So, sorry, guys. No liveblogging from me! And hey, it’s not as if I could have posted anything from the Nutter Center. I don’t think I can get on Wright State’s wireless.)

Hee. Don’t really mind. The news is just as good when you get it late and weren’t there to see it made. I’m feeling very chuffed, and even contemplating making a fanvid. (But I will not gloat in front of my little brother the Democrat. No. Not at all. Just behind his back.)

And hey, maybe that Hermeneutic of Continuity blogpriest will become the Archbishop of Westminster!

In related news, we find out that both the Juneau Empire and the Associated Press think Wright State is in Dayton, Massachusetts.

Wright State. Wright Brothers. Which Dayton could it possibly be? HMMMM?

Alleged journalists. Alleged editors. And yet, they make money.

That’s what makes me sigh.

Nancy Pelosi’s people say that she’s studied the Fathers on abortion, and takes all her inspiration from St. Augustine. They said it was “On Exodus”, but that’s not what you want to look for. What you want is Quaestionum in Heptateuchum. Liber 2 is Quaestiones in Exodum. Go to Section 80. It’s about Genesis 21:22-25 — but a different version from the usual one.

(Btw, did I mention that cool Section 1 at the very beginning of Book 2? The one about how it was okay for the midwife to lie to Pharaoh, because it helped save babies’ lives and was no skin off Pharaoh’s nose? No, you want to hear Section 80….)

Okay…. Prepare for yet another incredibly ugly and incompetent Latin translation, courtesy of me! But hey, if I mess up enough, the Latinists will come out to tell me what I did wrong. (UPDATE: I’ve moved the bulk of St. Augustine’s Latin down to the bottom of the post, but it’s still available for factchecking.)

——————————————————

Utrum quod in utero formatum adhuc est, animatum posset intellegi.

(Whether what is already formed in the womb can be understood as ensouled.)

——————————————————————————

First, the Bible part. Literally, the Latin quote from the version of Exodus that St. Augustine is using says: “If two men quarrel, and they strike what a woman’s womb is holding, and her infant not yet shaped should come out (be miscarried, or be born prematurely)…“

The middle part isn’t quoted. (Not unusual, in the Fathers. They quote only what they’re talking about.) Then the Latin goes on to say: “…the damages permitted will be as much as the woman’s husband announces, and he will give it at request.“

Augustine’s commentary goes on from there:

——————————————————————–

To me it seems that this is said for some cause of significance; more is done than what this kind of Scripture seems to be busy with. For if only that were being paid attention to, a struck pregnant woman would not be forced into miscarriage (abortum), two quarreling men would not be provided when by one it could be done and admitted that he would quarrel by this same woman — or would not even quarrel, but would do willing harm to another’s posterity. It [Scripture] thus truly did not will homicide to be extended to an unformed newborn, because surely what is so carried in the womb is not classified as a man.

Here the question of the soul is accustomed to stir: whether what is not formed can indeed be understood as not ensouled; and therefore that it is not homicide, because it can be said not yet to have been determined whether it did not have a soul yet.

Following that, it says: “Si autem formatum fuerit, dabit animam pro anima.”

["But if it was formed, he will give life for life." Literally, "breath for breath" or "soul for soul".]

Whereby what else is understood, except that he himself would die?

For in this and in the others it now instructs on this occasion: “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, bruise for bruise” — clearly the justice of retaliation.

That Law therefore is set up so that it demonstrates what vengeance is owed. Namely, if it is not understood through the Law what is owed by vengeance, from which it is understood what was relaxed by pardon, how can it be said: “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors“?

Therefore, debtors are shown through the Law, so that as much is seen to be pardoned as is forgiven. Namely, neither are we forgiven debts, unless we did discern by the sign what is owed to the Law.

If, therefore, this newborn was still formless as yet, but already ensouled in a formless way (because the great question of the soul is not thrown down, unpleaded, by rash opinion), therefore the Law does not will that it be extended to homicide, because a live soul cannot yet be said to be in this body that lacks feeling, if such is in flesh not yet formed and therefore not yet gifted with senses.

But it also said: “And he will give it at request” — what the woman’s husband decided would be given for the removed formless one — is not to be understood easily. “Asioma“, of course - what the Greek holds — is understood in many ways, and more tolerably is said “at request” than if it were understood another way.

Indeed, perhaps he will demand what he should give; so that in this way, he does something adequate for God’s sake, even if the woman’s husband should not ask it.

—————————————————————

First of all, notice that it’s a question of accidental manslaughter, not intentional murder or intentional abortion.

Notice the humble “if” and “whether”. St. Augustine is eager to grapple with the fascinating question of ensoulment, but he shies away from definitely saying the soul is not there. All he is saying is that it’s impossible to say, given what was known to him and his time, whether or not the soul’s there when the senses aren’t yet. Also that, since the Israelites couldn’t tell for sure whether the unborn child had a soul, it wasn’t quite fair to make someone pay soul for soul. (In his opinion. Being careful to avoid “rash opinion” or overly certain pronouncements.)

He says this based on a Bible translation not the same as that used by modern scholars; so there’s another factor.

Furthermore, the whole thing should make us more careful not to offend God, more eager to be more forgiving than the Law — but at the same time, the offender should pay more than the Law requires, of his own accord. Everyone should be in awe of our forgiving but just God.

None of this is considered in Nancy Pelosi’s interpretation.

(Especially not the mendacious, baby-saving midwife in Section 1.)

Btw, here’s a good modern take on the wording of this Bible passage.

UPDATE: Father Z has a good reference on St. Augustine and abortion which, among other things, explains a lot about the Bible wording that St. A used above. Basically, he was working off the Septuagint version in Greek, which apparently translated “harmed” as “formed” and “unharmed” as “unformed”. Everybody working off the Greek, and the Latin translation of the Greek, assume that the Bible was talking about the age of the fetus rather than whether the premature baby got hurt in the process. Ooops.

UPDATE AGAIN: I guess my translation wasn’t hideously inaccurate, as Fr. Z has very kindly linked and reposted it in a post encouraging bloggers to keep passing on the truth about this issue. Had I known he was going to repost it, I wouldn’t have moved things around so much when I updated. Hope I haven’t confused people too much!

———————————————————————–

St. Augustine in his own words, moved down here for readers’ convenience:

80. (21, 22-25) Si autem litigabunt duo viri, et percusserint mulierem in utero habentem, et exierit infans eius nondum formatus; detrimentum patietur, quantum indixerit vir mulieris, et dabit cum postulatione.

Mihi videtur significationis alicuius causa dici haec, magis quam Scripturam circa huiusmodi facta occupatam. Nam si illud attenderet, ne praegnans mulier percussa in abortum compelleretur, non poneret duos litigantes viros, cum possit et ab uno hoc admitti, qui cum ipsa muliere litigaverit, vel etiam non litigaverit, sed alienae posteritati nocere volendo id fecerit. Quod vero non formatum puerperium noluit ad homicidium pertinere, profecto nec hominem deputavit quod tale in utero geritur.

Hic de anima quaestio solet agitari, utrum quod formatum non est, ne animatum quidem possit intellegi, et ideo non sit homicidium, quia nec examinatum dici potest, si adhuc animam non habebat.

Sequitur enim et dicit: Si autem formatum fuerit, dabit animam pro anima. Ubi quid aliud intellegitur, nisi, et ipse morietur? Nam hoc et in caeteris ex hac occasione iam praecipit: Oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente, manum pro manu, pedem pro pede, combustionem pro combustione, vulnus pro vulnere, livorem pro livore: talionis videlicet aequitate. Quae Lex ideo constituit, ut demonstraret quae vindicta debeatur. Nisi enim per Legem sciretur quid vindictae deberetur, unde sciretur quid venia relaxaret, ut dici posset: Dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris? Debitores igitur Lege monstrantur, ut quando ignoscitur appareat quid dimittatur. Neque enim debita dimitteremus, nisi quid nobis deberetur Lege indice disceremus. Si ergo illud informe puerperium iam quidem fuerit, sed adhuc quodammodo informiter animatum (quoniam magna de anima quaestio non est praecipitanda indiscussae temeritate sententiae), ideo Lex noluit ad homicidium pertinere, quia nondum dici potest anima viva in eo corpore quod sensu caret, si talis est in carne nondum formata, et ideo nondum sensibus praedita. Quod autem dixit: Et dabit cum postulatione quod maritus mulieris, informi excluso, dandum constituerit, non est in promptu intellegere: quippe, quod graecus habet, pluribus modis intellegitur, et tolerabilius cum postulatione dictum est, quam si aliud diceretur. Fortassis enim postulabit ut det, ut eo modo satis Deo faciat, etiamsi maritus mulierve non expetat.

Big hulking tattooed bikers who like sweet little furry animals and hate people who hurt them.

Together, they fight crime!

“Comfort book” is not what these two series are for me, precisely, but they did make me smile and laugh plenty. (Not for kids, though, that’s for sure.)

Karma Girl and Hot Mama by Jennifer Estep are set in a superhero version of our world. Nearly everybody bears alliterative names, rich playboys have secret identities and Fight Crime, bombs are made out of explodium, and villains have amazing powers. This is a very good concept for a connected romance series, as comics have always been a lot like soap operas in their rivers of plot and character. (And of course, the Marvel superhero Hellcat was once the Marvel love comic heroine Patsy Walker.) However, most superhero romance fanfic is angsty like the X-Men. Estep prefers screwball comedy.

She comes up with some very fun characters. Carmen is a scruffy, quickwitted, and sharp-tongued ordinary human reporter with a well-founded grudge against heroes and “ubervillains” alike. Fiona is a hotheaded fashion designer with the power of fire, a lost love she still grieves for, and an extremely fast metabolism. Her next book will feature a heroine who despises her annoying superpower of luck, and all the wacky happenings it causes.

Her authorial voice (first person superhero) is convincing, and the party of the first book comes off quite differently than the party of the second. It’s also nice to see these ladies have their own ideas about each of the other continuing characters. Best of all, Estep can both take her own world lightly, and believe in it enough to make the reader believe it. I’ve read a lot of self-conscious books by recent authors, and it drives me nuts. Also, the plots were interesting. The second book’s plotline was simpler and moved along a lot more speedily, but the complications of the first book allowed more exploration of the world and the characters.

In the first book, I found myself skipping the sex scenes and some of the love ones, because frankly they didn’t seem well integrated with the much more interesting action plotline. It was difficult to buy that the people going at each other were the same people doing all the chatting and arguing over the past and Fighting Crime. (Although I might be judging this overharshly, because I was sick that day. Also, I apparently skimmed past some very intentionally funny stuff, so maybe I need a reread.) Anyway, in the second book, I did not feel any disconnect of personality.

(Though honestly, I think Estep could do without sex scenes. You can read those in any number of novels, romance or otherwise, and they’re usually unnecessary. Well-written superhero fic is a good deal rarer. But aeh — I understand the genre rules.)

Deanna Raybourn is writing what I’d call mystery-themed romance rather than a romantic mystery series. (No sex scenes, but lots of romance genre prose at moments of romantic tension. Well done, though, and not unoriginal.) I read the second book in the series first; but since the author valiantly refused to spoil book one, there were no ill effects.

The series is set in Victorian England. The heroine, Lady Julia Grey, is very rich and comes from a large, noble, unconventional family. (All very useful resources for a detective.) In the first book, Silent in the Grave, Lady Julia finds out, over her husband’s body, that he had hired an inquiry agent, Nicholas Brisbane, to find out who was sending him death threats. The two end up working together — though not in any tidy fashion — to solve the mystery.

Brisbane is a lot like Sherlock Holmes — but the book finds ways of pointing out, rather amusingly, that this actually makes him a lot like a dark brooding Bronte hero, too. (Doyle was influenced a lot by the old Gothic stuff, so this totally makes sense. But it’s really amusing.)

In the second book, Silent in the Sanctuary, Lady Julia does the traditional cozy mystery thing and comes home for a big Christmas house party at the old family estate. Of course bodies are bound to turn up.

I was not particularly thrilled by some aspects of the unconventional family members. But it was interesting to see how she used these characters to deflect potential criticism of certain un-PC elements of her mysteries. Also, she managed to throw in any number of Victorian mystery tropes that would rightly upset people in any other context. Her witty writing encouraged me to suspend my disbelief through a lot of improbable stuff; but again, one expects wonders and horrors and very strange people in a Victorian mystery.

The only problem is that sometimes her work is invaded by that self-consciousness so many modern writers have.They can’t let you fall into a spell; they have to stop and point out that you’re reading a book that they don’t really believe in. This makes it harder to suspend disbelief than any amount of improbable occurrences. Fortunately, Raybourn only has an occasional touch of this; and I hope to see it vanish in the next book.

Anyway, that’s the two fun series. Not terribly edifying in certain ways, but interesting and funny, with a lot of real thought and feeling in them.

The French have a word for it, it seems. They call our shortlived wolfhounds “heartbreak hounds”.

I mentioned before that we recently found out that my family’s Irish wolfhound, Liath, had an inoperable tumor in her innards. Well, her liver has been failing, she’s been less and less able to eat and drink enough to keep her alive, and my parents have had to give her pain pills at more frequent intervals. She’s barely eaten or drunk anything the last few days, and last night my mother was reduced to giving her ice to keep Liath’s tongue from sticking to her mouth and gums. She could barely walk this morning.

So my parents called the veterinarian, and made an appointment to have her put to sleep, after my dad came home from his retirement job.

Liath has always been a very affectionate dog, because she was rescued from a puppy farm. She birthed and had taken from her two litters of puppies before she turned two, and she grew up in a locked pen, expecting nothing to be above her but a blank ceiling. She was very happy to come to my parents, very happy to eat anything given to her, very happy to follow people around the house or play with them outside. It was out in the yard that the squirrels taught her about “up”. She never caught them, but she taught the squirrels and chipmunks to build their nests in another yard.

She loved my parents’ cuckoo clock, and quickly decided it was her job to remind everyone of the daily schedule. She loved to ride in the car, as long as she was sure she would come home again, and going on walks was the big excitement of her day.

So on the last day of her life, in the daily excitement of having my dad come home, Liath got up and ran to meet him. When they went to take her to the vet, she managed to jump into the car.

This is what breaks your heart — did you give up too soon, or could you have spared them a night of pain by going earlier?

And this is why dogs are a little mysterious — how in the world did she even manage to get up again, after being so sick so long?

———————————-

I’d also like to apologize for my bad temper the last few weeks. I was mostly in good spirits when I could visit my parents’ house, but anticipatory grief hit me very hard the rest of the time. I know I’ve been a pill. Please forgive me. A dog is not a human, no — but a dog is still something very precious.

As the Smith of Culann complained, once upon a time:

My life is a wilderness, and my household like a desert,
with the loss of my hound!
He guarded my life and my honour,
a valued servant, my hound, taken from me.

From the country of Georgia, via the recipe blogger Milk and Pumpkin.

This looks delicious. I particularly like the little breakfast egg boats.

Courtesy of an interesting Polish cook’s recipe blog, a recipe from Egypt for zucchini pudding.

From the same blogger, cheesy zucchini patties for dinner, from Turkey.

Apparently, the Spanish-speaking world was fond enough of Pope Pius IX that it named desserts after him. Some describe them as looking like his head, but I guess it’s more his tiara or miter.

Here’s a Spanish site. The piononos of Santa Fe, which they claim are the original ones, look like a sort of popover-shaped cake or muffin. They describe them as “Spanish petit-fours”. They also have a blog, to attempt to make you drool.

Here’s some Malaga piononos.

Piononos in Argentina are a sort of elaborate jelly roll. Here’s a Peruvian egg company’s recipe for a similar four-egg pionono roll. Scroll down for one with 9 eggs, but most of that’s for the blancmange filling, I think. I guess that’s why other people make low calorie piononos. Another roll recipe.

This pionono recipe isn’t even a cake. It’s plantains stuffed with cheese and then corked with flour, eggs, and water. Puerto Rican roadside food booths apparently go with plantains and seasoned ground beef and then deep fry the puppy.

An Argentine-style bakery in Miami, FL, offers a salad version of a pionono! Italians apparently also feel that a pionono can be a salad or a sweet. In Uruguay, a pionono is a rolled submarine sandwich!

So if it’s cylindrical and yummy, it’s a pionono.

In the 1912 Olympics in Stockholm, Sweden, the US pentathlon team consisted of:

Lt. George S. Patton — He nearly killed himself trying to win a medal, and placed 5th — or maybe he really placed higher, and was robbed by bad refereeing. Either way, destined to do big things with tanks. But first, he had to go from zero to fencing hero, ride a perfect round on a horse he didn’t know, and survive his coach drugging him.

Jim Thorpe — He won gold in pentathlon and decathlon, and is perhaps the greatest athlete of all time. He played pro football and pro baseball. A member of the Sac and Fox/Sauk tribes from the plains of Oklahoma, he kicked ass, took names, and chewed bubblegum — then had his medals taken away in disgrace.

Avery Brundage — Destined to become the highly controversial head of the International Olympics Committee for many years, for good and ill. He finished 6th and 16th in the 1912 pentathlon and decathlon; and he’s the guy who informed on Thorpe to the IOC!

There has GOT to be a movie in this.

Just showing the men’s training, and their performance in the pentathlon would be a great and highly scenic movie. You’d see them swimming, running, riding horses, shooting pistols, and fencing, too. And then, when the pentathlon is over and the medals given out, the twists begin.

Was Brundage really the sorest loser of all time, turning on his teammate out of spite and (probably) racism, too? Was he acting out of idealism, perhaps tormented by the horror of having to turn in a gold medalist from his own country?

And then Patton, who’d subdued his own natural demand to win to the decision of the judges, at least publicly. Did he know about what Brundage did? (Surely he couldn’t have — but what would he have done if he’d found out about such a breach of what he’d been taught as an honor code? Would he have only suspected? Would he have tried to learn the truth? Was there any history between the two later on, especially given Brundage’s pro-Nazi sympathies later on?)

But most of all, Thorpe. What would it be like, to be the poor boy, the natural athlete, and the minority guy among a bunch of rich sportsmen who only did sports for fun, and crazy grinds like Patton who made hard work replace natural talent? What would it be like, to go from Oklahoma to the thrones of kings, and then to fall — only to get back up again, and have a full career, however checkered?

Who would have bonded with whom? Who would have understood each other’s manners and values best? Who would have made more friends among the other teams — friends destined to fight and perhaps die in the First and Second World Wars, who would perhaps trade fire with Patton?

I’m telling you, this could get more interesting than Chariots of Fire.

You could call it something like “Aiming for Gold“.

And if that doesn’t work, my dad thinks you should kidnap them through a space-time portal and bring them to a fantasy land to be destined heroes. ‘Cause, you know, Jim Thorpe would be a pretty awesome Hero of Destiny, and so would Patton. (Maybe Brundage can be Aramis. Or Judas.)

I forgot to post last night about a really fascinating project on the website of St. Luke’s Parish in Beavercreek, Ohio. (The Beavercreek that’s a suburb of Dayton, not the “Beaver Creek” on the other side of the state.)

Some wonderful soul has scanned in, and posted, the parish bulletins from 1955 to 1976, right next to the current run. I do not think you could possibly find a finer snapshot of change and continuity in a parish, without someone writing a book. Even hymn listings are included.

When the run of bulletins begins, the parish does not yet have a church and had to meet for Mass at a nearby public school. (What was then “Beavercreek Primary School” on “Xenia Pike” is now “Main Elementary” on “Dayton-Xenia Road”.) Over the course of time, the parish converted a barn into Bishop Ford Hall and a house into a rectory, and since then has built a church, school, convent, new cafeteria, and new church.

There are many surprises for a Catholic my age. Apparently the 8 AM Mass at St. Luke’s was still in Latin in 1970. So my childhood memories of my mom complaining about Latin’s absence — she was complaining about a deprivation that was RECENT.

“Our Parish Is a Tithing Parish”. It is??

“A Sister receives about $700.00 a year for teaching; a Lay Teacher a minimum of $2000. The difference, $1300, is what a Religious Sister contributes.”

“We ask St. Luke to bring us better weather for the Tuesday evening Meeting at the High School Cafeteria.”

“WHO WILL BE FIRST????
“An all expense trip to Cincinnati for one day is offered to each of the three boys who learn their Mass Latin first. Get set Boys!”

————————————————————————–

“Through a great mystery, the all powerful and all-good God has designed that men should share in carrying on the mission of His Son become Man. All are called to share in carrying on in space and time the Mission of Christ. Our campaign [raising money to build the parish]  is based on this vocation… We are instruments of God… Pro Deo.

“Please pray daily for the success of our campaign.

“Sincerely yours in Christ,

“Martin T. Gilligan, Pastor.”

———————————————————————-

In 1955, people were already worried about a relative decline in numbers of Catholic women going into the religious life. Oh-ho….

There’s also a (retrospectively) sad posting from Fr. Jansen, when he first became pastor later in the seventies, about what he’d been taught by the archdiocese were the responsibilities of a “Pastoral Administrator”. Depressingly, there is no mention of any real pastoral stuff — just business. No wonder the job ate him up.

Anyway, it’s all interesting!

I know, I know, the Holy Spirit does this stuff to help us and I need to embrace suffering as a way toward perfection, it says here. But honest to goodness, sometimes the good Lord is Not Subtle.

So yeah, there’s all this stuff going on with our poor dog (who is actually getting a lot of enjoyment out of being sick, being a dog who appreciates the bright side of life, i.e. being hand-fed lots of treats and goodies). And there I go, reading that POV poem for St. Andrew and writing a little song after it, and trying to do the whole embrace the cross thing.

So should I have figured that there was something else in the way of suffering coming on? Ho, yus. That’s just the way God works. (And I’d tell you folks all about it, but it’s not really my story, and public bitching about it also precludes really offering it up. But it’s nothing anybody’s going to die from, so don’t worry.)

So I can’t complain. It’s not like it’s martyrdom like poor “Rania” got, and I do try to offer it up, and it does seem to be in the way of process improvement. (So, yeah, thank you for the favors, St. Joseph. You’re doing a lot for us this year and I APPRECIATE IT.)

But seeing as I’m not St. Therese, that does not console me very much. Embracing the Cross just means getting more use out of events and making love more available to others; it doesn’t mean it hurts any less.

Oh, well. The Father’s loved more by the younger son who bitches and moans and then does the job, then by the one who claims he’s going to do it and doesn’t.  I’m both those guys.

Anyway, the pre-feast mortification is now officially done, ’cause it’s now the Feast of the Assumption. Eat lots of fruit and have fun on Lady Day in Summer, folks!

Saudi member of the “religious police” recently killed his own daughter for becoming a Christian. He cut her tongue, then burned her to death — a common method of ‘honor killing’.

The girl was a blogger under several handles, including “Rania”.

“She wrote that her life became an ordeal after her family members grew suspicious about her after a religious discussion with them.

She said that her brother found some Christian articles written by her as well as a cross sign on her computer screen. Since then he started to insult her and blamed the internet for pushing her to change her religion.”

Holy Rania, pray for us!

UPDATE: More on the story in the comment boxes of a site called Crossroads Arabia:

Saudi in US said:

I think this story is the same as one that was covered on blogs last week. Teh version I saw was a little different and indicated the brother killed her. Also, that no charges were filed in the case, the death was ruled accidental. She must have stuck her tongue in a 220 electrical outlet to lose the tongue and burn.

I think the story of the girl is accurate as there is a voice recording of an hr long interview with her on the web. The girl in the interview spoke about her conversion with a very hard to replicate Hijazi accent (Egyptian Copts groups will not be able to do it without a Saudi) and sounded well educated. It is a very sad story.

I think King Abdullah as an opportunity here to show that his initiative for religious tolerance is real. If the story is true, he needs to step in with all his authority to bring justice. If he doesn’t, he will lose a lot in international opinion. I know it is a tough spot for the king, but he made an international commitment and needs to step to the plate and hit one now. I just cannot see how he can avoid deal with the international publicity this will bring otherwise.

It’s very common, in cases of ‘honor killing’, to get a juvenile male member of the family to take the rap for the murder, when in reality the whole family was involved or the elders did it. It’s also historically been very common for Christian martyrs to have their tongues wounded or cut out, by people who hate the truth they’re speaking. St. Romanus of Caesarea and St. Christina are good examples of this. Heck, you know the famous Egyptian Coptic priest and TV apologist, Father Boutros? His older brother was apparently martyred and had his tongue cut out for preaching. Ouch.

But there’s a really nasty sort of desperation in using an electrical outlet to torture a daughter who spread the Gospel by electron. May it be remembered to her glory.

Holy Rania, pray for us!

– Excerpts from the EF Mass for Virgin Martyrs:

I spoke of Thy testimonies before kings, and I was not ashamed: I meditated also on Thy commandments, which I loved exceedingly. Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord.

I will give glory to Thee, O Lord, O King, and I will praise Thee, O God my Savior. I will give glory to Thy name: for Thou hast been a helper and protector to me… And Thou has delivered me, according to the multitude of the mercy of Thy name, from them that did roar, prepared to devour; out of the hands of them that sought my life, and from the gates of afflictions which compassed me about: from the oppression of the flame which surrounded me… My soul shall praise the Lord even to death: because Thou, O Lord our God, deliverest them that wait for Thee, and savest them out of the hands of the nations.

Thou hast loved justice, and hated iniquity. Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness. Alleluia, alleluia. After her shall virgins be brought to the king: her neighbors shall be brought to thee with gladness. Alleluia.

Let the proud be ashamed because they have done unjustly towards me: but I will be employed in Thy commandments and in Thy justifications, that I may not be confounded.