I’ve had lot of email about the recent annual “Correspondents Dinner” in the nation’s swamp. Hence, I had to look at a few video clips of “roasting” which proves that “liberal comedian” is a contradiction in terms.
What struck me was that these ass-hat journalists, who accuse Pres. Trump of being coarse, or whatever it is that he is, then laughed at the pure dreck that issued from the microphone at the dinner. Really? Do they not have mirrors?
The best comment on that farce of a mutual-masturbatory dinner I have seen so far was framed by Fr. Rutler in his weekly column. Friends, take a moment. Read it. [It seems his page hasn’t been update since 1 April, so here it is in full]
Fr. Rutler’s Weekly Column
May 6, 2018
The exotic concept of spontaneous generation was taken seriously by astute thinkers for a long time before the invention of microbiology. Of course, they knew about the proximate process of birth, but the biological source of life itself exercised such minds as Anaximander six hundred years B.C. and Saint Augustine, Shakespeare, and the philosopher of fishing Izaak Walton, and was at least a puzzle to Darwin. [For the libs who are tuning in, yes, the English language has words with more than one or two syllables.]
Spontaneous generation was the theory that living organisms could arise from inanimate matter, like fleas born from dust, or mice from salt and bees from animal blood and, in the speculation of Aristotle, scallops coming out of sand. I came across an unintentionally amusing comment from the 1920 proceedings of the American Philological Society published by the Johns Hopkins University Press: “Since insects are so small, it is not surprising that the sex history of some of them totally eluded the observation of the ancients.”
The advent of micro-imagery photography of infants in the womb destroyed eugenic propaganda that this is not a human life. Those who deny that are on the level of those who continued to insist on spontaneous generation after the Catholic genius Louis Pasteur disproved it in 1859.
Cold people who are not only credulous but cruel, admit that the unborn child is human, but say “So what?” At the recent White House Correspondents’ dinner, an astonishingly vulgar comedienne joked about abortion to the laughter of pseudo-sophisticates in evening dress. But even she slipped and used the word “baby.” [!]
Christ used the image of the vine to explain that all life is contingent, not spontaneously generated, but dependent on other lives. “A branch cannot bear fruit on its own unless it remains on the vine.” Likewise, those drinking champagne at the fancy dress dinner are related to every fragile life in the womb by a common humanity. To mock that is to de-humanize the self.
On the recent feast of Saint George, there was born in England, whose patron he is, Louis, a prince of the royal house. There were celebratory church bells from Westminster Abbey and a salute of cannons. Rightly so, for the birth of every baby is a cause for rejoicing. That same day another baby, one with a neurological infirmity, was deprived of oxygen support by judicial decree and against the will of his parents, who brought him into the world by pro-creation, as stewards of the Creator and not by spontaneous generation. This was in defiance of an effort by Pope Francis to rescue him by military helicopter. As sons by adoption, little Louis and little Alfie are princes of the Heavenly King, not by spontaneous generation, but by divine will. Pope Leo XIII declared in Rerum Novarum: “The contention that the civil government should at its option intrude into and exercise intimate control over the family and the household is a great and pernicious error.”
I’ve gotta hand it to Rutler. He tied it together.
And if any of the pseudos in tuxedos read this – I picture them mouthing again and again the polysyllabic vocabulary – get dressed and look in the mirror and contemplate the fact that some day you, like all who were allowed to be born, will breathe your last, your heart will stop and you will go before your judge.
What’s your argument going to be to the Judge then:
“We had a great laugh at a correspondents dinner and really made a name for ourselves! We had camera time. You shoulda been there. We were great. Yeah… you shoulda been there.”