Fh Quotes

Kurt, could you please serve this invoice upon the Prussian Pickle, the Major General von Trotha for  the disrupting the legitimate working of F..H. Schmidt Engineering Services?

We are powerless when we wait for other people to act on our behalf.

When I hear that "Possession is the grave of love," I remember that a religion may begin with the resurrection.

Some things are better dealt within the cleansing light of transparency and openness rather than in the darkness of secrecy.

Knowledge is invariably a matter of degree : you cannot put your finger upon even the simplest datum and say 'this we know'.

FH: All these... weirdos, and me... getting a little better every day right in the middle of 'em. I had never known... I had never even imagined for a heartbeat that... there might be a place in the world for people like us...Jesus' Son

Truth on our level is a different thing from truth for the jellyfish.

We are all powerless in the face of evil. No, no, that's not true. We are powerless when we wait for other people to act on our behalf. Yes, that's it. The truly powerful man is the man who stands alone.

The Secret of Happiness is to admire without desiring. And that is not happiness.

My life can't just be interesting. It has to be meaningful.

There are many ways to give witness to faith.

No sense complaining about the world's freest press--we fought for it, we got it, now we have to live with the nonsense that it spews out.

We Americans are not God’s covenant people. America has, in any event, no biblical guarantee of perpetuity.

And I think you know what happens when you don't let the sunlight into dark places.

The arctic atmosphere, necessary for the maintenance of broadcast equipment, is air-conditioner sterile, with occasional stray smells of brewed coffee and toner for photocopying machines.

The man who is ready to prove that metaphysical knowledge is wholly impossible has no right here to any answer. He must be referred for conviction to the body of this treatise. And he can hardly refuse to go there, since he himself has, perhaps unknowingly, entered the arena. He is a brother metaphysician with a rival theory of first principles.

Repression often becomes a pattern of behavior leaving little need for release of anger. Upon reaching adulthood, the individual who thus far has adequately repressed rage since childhood may find himself in situations where he is unable to suppress hostile feelings.

También hay que contar las historias más pequeñas, de las que también podemos sacar algo que aprender.

I pray hard for all of us, to bring that change to the world like the people before us, and even better. Not only in this world, but hereafter too. ♥‎​

Evangelical theology is heretical if it is only creative and unworthy if it is only repetitious

Everything less than the Universe is an abstraction.

I expected a nod and maybe a handshake, but Dan clasped his hand to his chest, whispered something like "Chthulhu fh'tagn!" and spit into a urinal.

B2FH traces these various fusion reactions and explains the recipe for producing everything up to iron: it’s nothing less than evolution for elements.

I worry that all this secrecy, all this unwillingness to change, to evolve—to listen to reason—is eroding all that we stand for. Endangering everything that we have vowed to protect and defend.

It’s time to ask why [the United States] is the only country in the world where we permit our children to be saddled with tens — sometimes hundreds — of thousands of dollars of debt before they begin to earn a penny.

If God truly exists, especially as a living personal being, are not revelational considerations more significant than our own inner feelings and outer perceptual probings? And if divine revelation—a possibility still to be considered—provides an authoritative basis for religious faith, does not an insistent reduction of all knowledge to empirical factors become a prideful—that is, worldly wise—justification of unbelief in a transcendent revelation? If there be a God, he could scarcely desire from human beings a commitment only to empirical tentativeness about his reality.

In a different kind of society—a better kind—he would have been in school, would have had a chance to play, would have had better food to eat and cleaner air to breathe. And if he still died the way he eventually did, society's guardians, its authorities and lawmen, would have left no stone unturned to find out who was responsible.

Anton Chekhov said that, when the audience sees a loaded pistol on the wall in act 1, it must go off by act 3.

- Hugo... e nebun? îl întrebă Mazu printre dinți. Cu o umbră de îngrijorare, Yanosh îi cercetă chipul asudat, murdar, și tunica mânjită de o dâră de sânge. - Nebun? Oscilează.

– Nu te-oi speria cu Hugo, continuă rusul. Probabil c-o moarte din partea lui ți-ar părea mai comodă decât propria ta piele.

Sometimes he talks to her like she is a man. It does not matter. He does not touch her like she is one.

The compassion you seek is neither mine to give nor yours to ask for.

1. Metaphysics is the finding of bad reasons for what we believe upon instinct; but to find these reasons is no less an instinct. 2. The world is the best of all possible worlds, and everything in it is a necessary evil. 3. There are those who so dislike the nude that they find something indecent in the naked truth. 4. Eclecticism. Every truth is so true that any truth must be false. 5. True penitence condemns to silence. What a man is ready to recall he would be willing to repeat. 6. We say that a girl with her doll anticipates the mother. It is more true, perhaps, that most mothers are still but children with playthings. 7. Our live experiences, fixed in aphorisms, stiffen into cold epigrams. Our heart's blood, as we write it, turns to mere dull ink.

The life of a soul does not consist in the contemplation of one consistent world but in the painful task of unifying . . . jarring and incompatible ones, and passing, when possible, from two or more discordant viewpoints to a higher which shall somehow include and transmute them.

The modern loss of the God of the Bible has at the same time therefore involved a vanishing sense of human dependence on anything outside man himself; man sees himself as living on a planet devoid of any intrinsic plan and purpose, and supposedly born of a cosmic accident. He himself must originate and fashion whatever values there are. The current existential emphasis on man’s freedom and will to become himself, particularly on freedom and responsibility as the very essence of human life, regards external authority as a repressive threat. Man’s unlimited creative autonomy is exalted; this “authentic selfhood” consequently requires the rejection of all transcendently given absolute norms, for they are seen as life-draining encumbrances.

History’s most unusual and momentous news continues to be the message that the holy God provides sinful man a way of escape from the damning consequences of sin, and proffers him a new kind of life fit for both time and eternity. This ongoing global news is more important than the Allies’ rollback of Hitler and the Nazis, or modern technology’s putting a man on the moon, or scientific research’s latest medical breakthrough.

Whenever he finds himself at a social occasion that brings him into contact with law enforcement officials, Saenz tentatively trots out his theory. It is quickly withdrawn when some police general smiles patronizingly and says, “You’ve been watching too many foreign movies, Father Saenz; there are no serial killers in the Philippines.” The reasons offered simultaneously amuse and anger Saenz. “Our neighborhoods are too congested, our neighbors too nosy, our families too tightly knit for secrets to be kept and allowed to fester. We have too many ways to blow off steam—the nightclub, the karaoke bar, the after-work drinking binges with our fun-loving barkada. We’re too Catholic, too God-fearing, too fearful of scandal.

However marred, the world vessel of clay is not without some of the influence of the Master Molder. God has not left Himself entirely without witness in the global calamity; He discloses Himself in the tragedies as well as the triumphs of history. He works in history as well as above history. There is a universal confrontation of men and women by the divine Spirit, invading all cultures and all individual lives. There is a constructive work of God in history, even where the redemptive Gospel does not do a recreating work. The evangelical missionary message cannot be measured for success by the number of converts only. The Christian message has a salting effect upon the earth. It aims at a re-created society; where it is resisted, it often encourages the displacement of a low ideology by one relatively higher.

Common sense requires modern man’s recognition of the scientific method as a spectacularly useful instrumentality for transforming our environment. Respect and gratitude are indeed due the scientist for many comforts and conveniences furnished to modern living, often as the fruit of painstakingly sacrificial research and experimentation, although in recent times not often without financial reward. This practical success of science inclines many persons to a tacit acceptance of the scientific world-picture of external reality as a realm merely of impersonal processes and mathematically connectible sequences. Charles H. Malik observes rightly that all too often the highly merited prestige of scientists in their own fields of competence is transferred to areas of publicly expressed opinion in which they are novices.

The mystic must, of course, respect the canons of reason and the conventions of logic if he is to communicate anything whatever about ineffable reality. And yet, ultimate reality either is capable of intelligible representation, and in that case ineffability is a misnomer, or it is not, in which case the mystic has no ground whatever for speech about the Ineffable. It is one thing for a person to claim that he has seen a flying saucer, and on that basis to argue—contrary to those who have not— that such weird mechanisms exist, but it is more preposterous for someone to describe a reality which is said to be inherently inexpressible. It simply makes no sense for anyone publicly to claim that he has intuited the inexpressible. The mystic cannot formulate the experience which other men should have, if they would share his belief, since in the case of an “inexpressible intuition” nobody could know what anybody else’s experience was.

Rationalism has swerved between two radical extremes in its attitude toward revelation. There is the widespread present admission that reason is barren as a source of final truth, but that it would be a sell-out to madness to invoke revelational theology. But a very different tradition in the history of philosophy, not without recent representatives, holds that philosophy finds its ideal intellectual expression and summit in theology. For Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus and even Spinoza, philosophy is at its apex an intellectual love of the Divine. It is this regard for theology as “the inner side of a philosophy,” to use Miss Emmet’s phrase (The Nature of Metaphysical Thinking, p. 150), that turns some systems of metaphysics into a religious faith, albeit a false one. Such outlooks on the surface eliminate a direct clash between philosophy and theology. But, insofar as theology is viewed as the capstone of speculative philosophy, they do so only by denying the comprehensive intellectual implications of revealed theology, and in principle even deny to theology its own right of survival on the basis of special divine disclosure. Sooner or later—and usually sooner than its advocates think—this view works itself around to the other, in which rationalists suspect and disown all theology, only to discover at last that in doing so they have both idolatrized reason and emptied it into a vain thing.

With these developments the modern mind is no longer clearly a mind, but a temperament, a mood subject to frequent changes. Some interpreters think that Western culture may yet have a future of sorts on the basis of pragmatism, that is, a secular pluralistic mind. Pragmatism is the last stand for a culture that has lost a true center; in the welter of speculative disagreement and moral confusion it seeks a cultural pattern by dignifying every kind of divergence as a form of creativity. At the moment it enjoys undeserved reinforcement as a theory of life because of the spectacular practical successes of experimental science. But one scientific experiment with morality such as the Nazi barbarisms is too much, and one misadventure of atomic warfare may be too late. Pragmatism in any event contains the seeds of its own undoing. It professes to be tolerant of all views, but its concealed intolerance becomes clear when, confronted and seriously challenged by the Christian absolute, it dogmatically refuses to reconsider any return to universally valid truth and objective principle.

The human mind, just because man is by nature a spiritual-rational-moral agent, will not and cannot forever shun the larger issues of truth and reality; the nonmeta-physical and antimetaphysical eras always turn out to be transition interludes.

The task of Christian leadership is to confront modern man with the Christian world-life view as the revealed conceptuality for understanding reality and experience, and to recall reason once again from the vagabondage of irrationalism and the arrogance of autonomy to the service of true faith.

The basic issues reduce really to two alternatives: either man himself projects upon the world and its history a supernatural reality and activity that disallows objectively valid cognitive statements on the basis of divine disclosure, or a transcendent divine reality through intelligible revelation establishes the fact that God is actually at work in the sphere of nature and human affairs.

More is sacrificed by defecting from the truth of revelation than simply the truth about God and man and the world; loss of the truth and Word of God plunges into darkness the very truth of truth, the meaning of meaning, and even the significance of language. To sever the concerns of reason and life from the revelation of God as the final ground and source of truth and the good accommodates and accelerates the contemporary drift to nihilism. It is not merely Christianity that stands or falls with the reality of revelation. To avert a nihilistic loss of enduring truth and good, only the recovery of revelation will suffice.

On the other hand, while we insist that what is other than theology cannot determine the content of theology, or its nature as a science, do we imply that all the various academic disciplines may and must freely go their own way, independently and competitively, without any obligation to coordinate and adjust their claims about the real world or in the name of truth? Should not theology in the name of revelation and reason, and in view of the logical norms of noncontradiction and coherence, call the secular sciences to account? Ought it not, for example, challenge both the arbitrary positivist limitation of truth to the sensory world and technocratic scientific reduction of the real world to impersonal processes and relationships? To go yet a step farther, should not theology in the name of the truth of revelation elaborate a comprehensive framework wherein theology and all other sciences are together and equally answerable to criteria that apply to each and every claimant to knowledge of external reality?

And neither of them can turn away. “And he said to them, ‘Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “These people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.’” Mark 7:6–

Man’s only hopeful option in a universe of God’s making and governance lay in the acceptance and appropriation of this divinely inspired teaching. The Bible, the incomparably unique and authoritative source of spiritual and ethical truth, proffered all that is needful for human salvation and felicity; Scripture was a treasured divine provision that equips sinful rebels with valid information about the transcendent realm, and discloses the otherwise hidden possibility of enduring personal reconciliation with God.

The Fundamentalist does not think that the ends can be reached by various means, and that his method is better; if he did, the hostility would not be as serious.

I have love your name, I have loved the way you call my name, it's ok if now we are not tougher I will love you till my last breath

Der Computer ist dumm.

Lewis seems to have seen his move to Cambridge in January 1955 as marking a fresh start. It is striking how few of his writings of this later period of his life deal specifically with apologetic themes, if understood in terms of the explicit rational defence of the Christian faith. In a letter of September 1955, declining the invitation of the American evangelical leader Carl F. H. Henry (1913–2003) to write some apologetic pieces, Lewis explained that while he had done what he could “in the way of frontal attacks,” he now felt “quite sure” those days were over. He now preferred more indirect approaches to apologetics, such as those which appealed to “fiction and symbol.”[556] These remarks to Carl Henry—one of the most significant figures in the history of postwar American evangelicalism—are clearly relevant to the creation of Narnia. Many would see this comment about “fiction and symbol” as a reference to his Chronicles of Narnia, which can easily be categorised as works of narrative or imaginative apologetics, representing a move away from the more deductive or inductive argumentative approaches of his wartime broadcast talks.

A young child, or one of the lower animals, is given on Monday a round piece of sugar, eats it and finds it sweet. On Tuesday it sees a square piece of sugar, and proceeds to eat it. . . . Tuesday's sensation and Monday's image are not only separate facts, which, because alike, are therefore not the same; but they differ perceptibly both in quality and environment. What is to lead the mind to take one for the other. Sudden at this crisis, and in pity at distress, there leaves the heaven with rapid wing a goddess Primitive Credulity. Breathing in the ear of the bewildered infant she whispers, The thing which has happened once will happen once more. Sugar was sweet, and sugar will be sweet. And Primitive Credulity is accepted forthwith as the mistress of our life. She leads our steps on the path of experience, until her fallacies, which cannot always be pleasant, at length becomes suspect. We wake up indignant at the kindly fraud by which the goddess so long has deceived us. So she shakes her wings, and flying to the stars, where there are no philosophers, leaves us here to the guidance of — I cannot think what.

It may come from a failure in my metaphysics, or from a weakness of the flesh which continues to blind me, but the notion that existence could be the same as understanding strikes as cold and ghost-like as the dreariest materialism. That the glory of this world in the end is appearance leaves the world more glorious, if we feel it is a show of some fuller splendour; but the sensuous curtain is a deception and a cheat, if it hides some colourless movement of atoms, some spectral woof of impalpable abstractions, or unearthly ballet of bloodless categories. Though dragged to such conclusions, we cannot embrace them. Our principles may be true, but they are not reality. They no more make that Whole which commands our devotion than some shredded dissection of human tatters is that warm and breathing beauty of flesh which our hearts found delightful.

Forced connections are the worst. Stop tryna force people to love you, to like you, to be in ya life etc. You just gon end up emotionally exhausted. If they not putting in the same effort as you, leave em alone.

When you look at a great painting it’s like a conversation. It has questions for you. It raises questions in you…. …Being an artist is about discovering things after you’ve done them. Like Cézanne – after twenty years of that mountain (St. Victoire, fh) he found out what he was doing. If it isn’t a process of discovery, it shows.

The problem is not one of fundamental intellectual incompetence, or men could know nothing at all. Nor is it that the canons of reason and forms of logic are irrelevant to ultimate reality. Were that the case, we would be doomed from the outset to ontological skepticism. Rather, man the thinker, for whatever reason (Judeo-Christian theology would point to the fall and sinfulness of man) employs his intelligence to formulate comprehensive explanations of reality and life that not only rival each other, but together stand exposed as inadequate, inordinate world-wisdom when evaluated by the transcendent cognitive revelation which Judeo-Christian truth affirms. The human spirit slants its perspectives in a manner that does violence to the truth of revelation, while its very formulations are at the same time made possible because reason is a divine gift whose legitimate and proper use man has compromised.

[I talked this matter over with Douglas more than once. He did not know French well; but he could understand it and he was a rarely good translator as his version of a Baudelaire sonnet shows. In any dispute as to the value of a word or phrase I should prefer his opinion to Oscar's. But Ross is doubtless right on this point. F.H.]

(4151)GNP(4151) The ACRC signed MOUs on anti-corruption cooperation with Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Mongolia, respectively, and agreed on cooperative activities to build anti-corruption capacity and transfer anti-corruption policies to those countries

Once you are miserable you are miserable there's no getting out of misery even if you'll be succeeded to get out of it,once again it will hunt you down and conquer it will conquer your heart once again best way to deal with it is to enjoy it.

More fog!

一比一原版海尔布隆商学 院毕业 证成绩单(QV/1954 292 140) 挂科、不想读、拿不到文凭、专业为留学生办理毕业 证He was hand in glove with the Hon. Laurence Fitzgibbon, the youngest son of Lord Claddagh. He was intimate with Barrington Erle, who had been private secretary — one of the private secretaries — to the great Whig Prime Minister who was lately in but was now out. He had dined three or four times with that great Whig nobleman, the Earl of Brentford. And he had been assured that if he stuck to the English Bar he would certainly do well.

Pe observator, Yanosh, îl găsi afară, molfăind o portocală. Era o scândură de om cu chip ravisant, cu umerii ascuțiți și răbdarea mai puternică decât brațele (...)

- A fost odată un hoț în portul ăsta și se numea Gaiță.

- Cu ce mai vrei să te lămuresc? - Cine-a fost ăla de mai devreme? - Mayn, răsuflă blondul ușurat. Ar trebui să fie secundul, dar e doar degeaba. - Și William ar trebui să fie țintașul, dar e doar beat? Yanosh miji. - Văd că te prinzi repede.

Yanosh căscă năuc ochii la sunetul subțire, la fel de ascuțit ca pumnalul pe care tocmai îl scăpase. Imediat cum apăsă mai tare, de această dată cu tot brațul, Mazu șuieră un blestem, dar nu reuși să-l facă pe Yanosh să cedeze. De deasupra, el se aplecase pentru a doua oară, simțind pe obraz răsuflarea bucătarului, zbuciumată și temătoare. - Când ai de gând să le spui?

Hugo își linse un deget cu cea mai serioasă mină de care dispunea. Să spună că era alb era ca și cum ar fi zis „e soare afară”. - Pun la bătaie greutatea lui în aur pentru fiecare membru din echipajul dumitale, își reveni Perucă după câteva momente de stat în cumpănă. - Dublează. - Pe jumătate. - Serios? - Credeam că urma să cer suma asta, nu s-o ofer, dar văd că ai de gând să joci în continuare. Căpitanul termină de mestecat. Brusc mai serios, trezorierul se aplecă peste masă, iar tonul vocii îi deveni mai jos. - Problema e că noi doi nu jucăm după aceleași reguli.

Rolland inspiră adânc. Îi întoarse spatele, blestemându-se când gândurile îi scăpară printre buze. - Unde să se fi dus averea dobândită de Kidd? - Au luat-o alții! A luat-o marea! Chiar nu pricepi că nu mai există?! - A luat-o mă-ta și s-a dus la dracu’!

Câteva minute și o împușcătură mai târziu, stătea întins pe nisip. Avea mâinile sub cap, un crab singuratic aproape de tălpi, ghetele uzate în dreapta și un om mort în stânga.

- Ăla-i Will?! Cum naiba a ajuns în pom?!

Împăturind scrisoarea Valynei, încerca să alunge senzația că făcuse schimb de piei cu un copil rănit, pe care sora ghinionului îl învelea înainte de culcare.

– Ar trebui să apreciezi libertatea. Și nu mai mârâi așa! Gaițele ciripesc, nu se pregătesc să latre.

Drept cadou de nuntă mi-ar prinde bine timpane noi.

Ai ales să vii pe mare, dar dedesubtul ei suntem cu toții singuri, apoi morți. Poate de asta, dacă te-ntrebai, privilegiile tale de muiere nu contează nici când suntem încă deasupra.

– Ceilalți din echipaj or să aibă vreun cuvânt de spus? se încordă șeful de echipaj. Sau o să ne tragi după tine, ca până acum? – Pot rămâne la mal. S-or găsi alți curajoși în locul lor să facă onoare prostească pirateriei, sub comanda mea. – Nu tuturor le convine să roadă lămâi. – A venit rândul meu să calc pe cadavre, Seraphim. N-o să te învinovățesc dacă din lămâia asta nici să muști n-o să vrei.  

there is little reason to think that interest group pressure is invariably benign, where a concentrated rich group (e.g., an industry association) competes against a dispersed and poorly organized group (e.g., consumers).

It is conventional to distinguish between thick and thin definitions of the rule of law.12 A thick definition would include democratic institutions and the protection of personal and religious freedom. As I define it, a thin definition of the rule of law would include substantive private law rights: contracts are enforced and private parties are protected from looting by the state or other private parties. Countries that adhere to a thick definition are attractive places to live; countries that adhere to a thin definition are attractive places to do business.

According to Fuller, laws should be (1) general, (2) publicly promulgated, (3) prospective (i.e., not retroactive), (4) clear, (5) consistent (i.e., not contain any contradictions), (6) practicable (i.e., not demand the impossible), (7) constant over time, and (8) congruent with the actions of officials. If we accept that list as defining the rule of law, America’s departures from it will be apparent to readers of this book.

Fuller’s procedural categories provide an inadequate definition of the rule of law. A legal regime might offer generality, publicity, clarity, consistency, constancy over time, and congruency with regulators, and still be a legal system from Hell. It might weaken property rights and impose civil liability on the flimsiest of grounds, all the while conforming to Fuller’s idea of law.

many foreign investors view the U.S. legal environment as a liability when investing in the United States.”21 Skeptics deride such statements as self-serving, but they are hard to ignore in the present economic environment. U.S. multinationals shed 864,000 U.S. jobs in the first decade of this century. The jobs are coming back, mind you, just not here. During the same period, U.S. multinationals increased employment overseas by 2.9 million.22 Similarly, the U.S. share of global foreign direct investment declined from 31 percent in 1980 to 13 percent in 2006.

no legal system is as consistently as pro-plaintiff as that of America, and that might give both sides pause. Comparative law is a two-way street. To take but one example, discussed by Michael Trebilcock, the Canadian Supreme Court has imposed damages caps for non-pecuniary losses, but when similar rules were enacted here by state legislatures, they were often struck down by state Supreme Courts. What is mandated there is prohibited here. If we are told to look to foreign law when it comes to capital punishment, then, we might also do so for the private law questions discussed in this book.

What corruption is for poor countries, lobbying is for rich ones, a means of obtaining political influence through the expense of money.9 No other country has anything like the number of American lobbyists who load up legislation with interest group bargains.

. It would also be helpful if (magically) we knew how many of a country’s lawyers were active in the practice of law, and how many of them were transactional lawyers. Finally, we would want to know whether lawyer-legislators are on average more likely to support legislation that promotes litigation.

Trial lawyers minded to defend America’s high litigation levels sometimes argue that, were they lower, we would require a greater degree of regulation. This assumes that litigation and regulation are substitutes: more of one, less of the other. That argument would be more persuasive if the regulatory burden were higher in other countries with lower litigation levels. That’s not the case, however. When first-world regulatory regimes have been compared, American regulatory law stands out as more detailed, complex, legalistic, and adversarial.

In his line of work, nobody ever calls in the dead of night. Still he forgives her for her sudden departures. His large, powerful body is always invincibly warm in this freezing room; he likes to turn up the air conditioning and have her burrow into his warmth. For a few moments she considers staying here, her cheek against his chest, letting his heartbeat lull her back into warm, safe sleep. Then, very reluctantly, she sits up. She watches the outline of his body under the covers, and out of habit she reaches out and runs the soft, fleshy pad of her right thumb across the long, brown lashes of his left eye. The eye shuts tighter as the other one opens. Green flecked with gold, catching what little light there is in the room. “Give me one good reason.” She cannot think of anything to say. “Thought not.” The huge hands with their thick fingers come up behind her head and pull it against his chest. She breathes him in, the smell of soap and warm skin and cigarette smoke. She loves the smell of him, even if she is allergic to secondhand smoke. He cannot, will not stop smoking, and she has to take antihistamines before she sees him. Small sacrifices, like not being able to go out with him in broad daylight, the slight twinge of envy she feels seeing lovers walk through malls and parks with their arms locked around each other. His daylight hours do not belong to her, and neither do these nights; she steals them like a common thief from a wife and children whose faces and names she does not want to know. Someday soon these sacrifices will not seem so small, and these nights will not be enough. She cannot bear the thought of that day coming, and yet somehow she cannot wait for it to come.

Suspected of ties with the Communist New People’s Army, he disappeared after a lightning rally of farmers and students in Manila in the early 1970s and had not been heard from since. His family believed he had been rounded up by the Metrocom, along with a few other activists and students who had taken part in the rally. He was one of the thousands — fifteen hundred by one count, more than three thousand by another — who fell victim to salvaging. It was a term perverted by the regime’s goons to refer to the extrajudicial killings that had become a dirty open secret of the dictatorship.

Mainly he just wanted to forget. High school was one very long, very bad dream.

The Church in this great Catholic country of ours is the last great, unexamined mystery. And I think you know what happens when you don’t let the sunlight into dark places, Father.

I didn’t like it. I didn’t want any of it. I. Didn’t. Want. It. How important it was to him to have said this, the one thing he could not say all those terrible, silent years. To have said it so clearly and unequivocally, with the last breath and strength of his life.

Funnily enough, I worry for exactly the opposite reasons. I worry that all this secrecy, all this unwillingness to change, to evolve — to listen to reason — is eroding all that we stand for. Endangering everything that we have vowed to protect and defend.

one side love is very powerful, and it hurts to but you should be strong never let your love go down

labou

FH argues that “[m]ajoritarianism is [a] signal idea of many authoritarians [who use it for] the proposition that elections are winner-take-all affairs in which the victor has an absolute mandate, with little or no interference from institutional checks and balances.”31

Therefore, the path of evangelical action seems to be an eagerness to condemn all social evils, no less vigorously than any other group, and a determination (1) when evangelicals are in the majority, to couple such condemnation with the redemptive Christian message as the only true solution; (2) when evangelicals are in the minority, to express their opposition to evils in a "formula of protest," concurring heartily in the assault on social wrongs, but insisting upon the regenerative context as alone able to secure a permanent rectification of such wrongs.

On the other hand, the secularizing speech of audio-visual technology more and more sets the tone for human thought and conduct. Deliberately and universally the mass media encroach upon modern man. Enhanced by color and cunning, television or radio or the printed page makes every last human soul a target of its propaganda. So astonishingly clever and successful have been these media in captivating the contemporary spirit—haunted as it is by moral vacillation and spiritual doubt—that Yahweh’s ancient exhortation to beware of visual idols would seem doubly pertinent today.

The crisis of word and truth is not, however, in all respects peculiar to contemporary technocratic civilization. Its backdrop is not to be found in the mass media per se, as if these sophisticated mechanical instruments of modern communication were uniquely and inherently evil. Not even the French Rèvolution, which some historians now isolate as the development that placed human history under the shadow of continual revolution, can adequately explain the ongoing plunge of man’s existence into endless crisis. Why is it that the magnificent civilizations fashioned by human endeavor throughout history have tumbled and collapsed one after another with apocalyptic suddenness? Is it not because, ever since man’s original fall and onward to the present, sin has plummeted human existence into an unbroken crisis of word and truth? A cosmic struggle between truth and falsehood, between good and evil, shadows the whole history of mankind. The Bible depicts it as a conflict between the authority of God and the claims of the Evil One. Measured by the yardstick of God’s holy purposes, all that man proudly designates as human culture is little but idolatry. God’s Word proffers no compliments whatever to man’s so-called historical progress; rather, it indicts man’s pseudoparadises as veritable towers of Babel that obscure and falsify God’s truth and Word.

The God who reveals himself is still addressing murmuring nomadic hearts that refuse to enter his promised land; he still calls vagabonds out of a modern wasteland to redemptive fellowship. As the Spirit of eschatological revelation presupposes the Old and New Testaments, and God ongoingly convicts men of sin and imparts new life to all who believe, his self-disclosure in the world takes its free course daily and hourly, even moment by moment, in a galaxy of revelational witness that renders mutinous man an inexcusable rebel.

Yet even in this public extension of its insistence on personal sensitivities, the New Left champions something less than an identifiable ideology of fixed principles and less than an articulate political platform and program. The personalism of the New Left easily channels into sentimental humanism, and just as easily, through frustration over a failure to achieve desired social changes by political activism, into inhumane violence in the guise of righteous indignation. Its confrontational politics lacks objective norms to control revolutionary propensities, even as it lacks objective criteria for escalating or deescalating a reliance on force to promote the preciousness of personality.

The biblical revelation proclaims from start to finish that the old self is a lost cause, and that man faces the future with hope only as a new creature, as a reborn self, spiritually enlivened to the supernatural world;