Private Love and Public Hate

We notice things in the Tavern. Well, should I say better that things are brought to my attention by the customers and I take notice. Some are notable.  It is also noticable - in hindsight, when someone brings it to notice - that when someone does a loving thing, even a 'gentlemanly' thing, we barely take any notice. It is 'quiet'.

On the other hand however when people are up to no good at all they exhibit their hatred, bad manners, disdain, ignorance  and crudity for everyone to see, whether they want to see it or not. Quiet it ain't. There may be a lesson or two in that, should we search for it.


A gentleman these days who quietly holds a shop door open for a random female is likely to get a loud mouthful of invective that the whole shop hears. You must have noticed that, surely. 

Looks alone can be deceptive though.

You might also have noticed some who at first glance might pass for mild-mannered gentlemen but something - a T-shirt perhaps, gives them away.

So it was that two chaps were in yesterday that gave clear examples. Now it is not often that worldly-famous folk just wander in but one such who keeps quiet most of the time was sitting in the corner supping a pint. Odd background it transpired. I won't say who he is until later. But he showed us a fine example of what a kind heart can do to change a person's life while quite unnoticed by the crowd. 

 I've never really told anyone about this.

I was walking and stopped in for lunch at a little cafe. From my window I saw a young teenage girl out in the cold, squatted down by the side of the road, holding a small bundle in her arms. She was panhandling, people were mostly walking by ignoring her. She just looked broken. 

I finished up my meal and went outside, went through my wallet and thought I'd give her $5 for some food. I got up to her and she was sobbing, she looked like she was 14-15. And that bundle in her arms was a baby wrapped up. 

I felt like I just got punched in the chest. She looked up putting on a game face and asked for any change, I asked her if she'd like some lunch. Right next door was a small quick-Trip type grocery store, I got a can of formula for the baby (very young, maybe 2-3 months), and took her back to the cafe though I'd just eaten. She was very thankful, got a burger and just inhaled it. Got her some pie and ice cream. 

She opened up and we talked. She was 15, got pregnant, parents were angry and she was fighting with them. She ran away. She had been gone almost 1 full year. 

I asked her if she'd like to go home and she got silent. I coaxed her, she said her parents wouldn't want her back. I coaxed further, she admitted she stole 5k in cash from her Dad. 

Turns out 5k doesn't last long at all and the streets are tough on a 15 year old. Very tough. She did want to go back, but she was afraid no one wanted her back after what she did.

We talked more, I wanted her to use my phone to call home but she wouldn't. I told her I'd call and see if her folks wanted to talk to her, she hesitated and gave bad excuses but eventually agreed. 

She dialed the number and I took the phone, her Mom picked up and I said hello. Awkwardly introduced myself and said her daughter would like to speak to her.  Silence, and I heard crying. Gave the phone to the girl and she was just quiet listening to her Mom cry, and then said hello. And she cried. They talked, she gave the phone back to me, I talked to her Mom some more.

I drove her down to the bus station and bought her a bus ticket home. Gave her $100 cash for incidentals, and some formula, diapers, wipes, snacks for the road.

Got to the bus, and she just cried saying thank you over and over. I gave her a kiss on the forehead and a hug, kissed her baby, and she got on the bus. 

I get a Christmas card every year from her. She's 21 now and in college. I've never really told anyone about this. I just feel good knowing I did something good in this world. Be the change you wish to see in the world.

Now ask yourself: what would you have done? Walk out of the cafe and walk on?  I can put $10 bucks on the table to say most people would.  Have a think of what sort of a person would do as he did.

Again I would put the $10 bucks to say it would be ordinary people, who weren't up themselves. People who attend to what is around them and attend to their personal duty to do something when something needs to be done. Something even quite small. Something private that will not attract TV cameras and interviewers.

Compare that with the scenes we see on our TV screens alsmost daily. Lucas Rosas took up my point.

The Hate-filled Haters of Hatred

I remember seeing a motherly looking lady of advanced middle years, being beaten to the ground in Federation Square [Melbourne] just over a year ago, by a jeering mob, for the crime of waving an Australian flag.

I remember watching a cheering throng, urged on by faculty and student union officials at La Trobe University, laughing and clapping as Marxist activists repeatedly kicked a be-suited dummy of John Howard in-between its legs, before hanging it by a noose.

 http://www.xyz.net.au/hate-filled-haters-hatred/

I remember watching a small, weekday leftist demonstration of a few dozen well fed activists, burning an effigy of Tony Abbott in central Melbourne, one week after the election in 2013.

These same people, who burned an image of a man who hadn’t even had the opportunity to yet pass any legislation, had spent the previous three years complaining endlessly about the apparent “hatred” that the poor, sainted martyr Julia Gillard had been forced to endure.

After all, didn’t someone print a rude menu about her once? And hold up a sign calling her a witch? And didn’t that notorious sexist Abbott once look at his watch while she was speaking?

 How could that possibly compare to “F— Abbott” T-Shirts being promoted by Fairfax? Decapitated likenesses on stage? Facebook pages promoting death threats being created at Geelong Trades Hall? Countless taxpayer subsidised banners in the street with Mr Abbott being hanged, burned to death and otherwise murdered?

This is not to point out the hypocrisy of the left; any reader of XYZ will already know just how blind the hate-filled haters of hatred are to their own deficiencies.

This is to question why Abbott in particular, and rightist figures in general, do so much to try to please people who base their entire identity on wanting anyone who disagrees with them humiliated, bleeding in the street, or dead?

Why did Abbott try so hard not to seem sexist, when it was clear for years before he became Prime Minister, that these ideologues would never allow him to escape this noose they had fashioned for him in a thousand classrooms, and with thousands more lines of print?

Why does the right allow the left to set the narrative? 

Is it just 'left and right'? Personally I see the left as a symptom of hatred. The left is an exhibition of hatred. The left mobs constantly decry the 'Right Wing Nazis' seemingly ignorant of the fact that the Nazis were left-wing. Socialists. Its in the name. Duh ! 

Dancing to whatever tune they please, writhing on our belly in the dirt before these self appointed arbiters of modern morality, to escape being called racist, sexist, or homophobic?

Regardless of the outcome of the US Presidential election, the rise of Trump has revealed that the imagined powers of our tax-fed cultural elites are mostly empty words. Illusions and paper tigers with only as much clout as we allow them to have.

The truth is, without our tax dollars, the high-and-mighty, self-righteous, sanctimonious sneerers would have no power at all.

No talking heads setting the narrative, no academics pontificating from on high, no black-clad thugs in the streets beating those who dare dissent.

So why isn’t defunding these leeches the main mission of all right-of-centre politicians and activists? 

Why did the Howard government spend its 2007 political capital on easily reversed Industrial Relations laws, while leaving the citadels of the Culture War untouched, and in some cases even buttressed?

Part of it is the fact that for so many conservatives and others to the right, it’s hard to see just how full of hate those on the other side are.

Is it? This is where the noticing comes in.  

We can perceive the fanaticism of an Islamic State Jihadist, but fail to see the same burning zeal, fevered brain and eyes fixed on a future-imagined paradise in the people all around us, our neighbours, our workmates, even the nice middle aged woman teaching our five year old at the local public school.

But these same people hate you so much that if you say the wrong thing, they will happily accept, and even work towards you losing your job, and being ostracised from society.

They will cheer as a privileged child clad in a mask and hood kicks you in the face, for the crime of thinking a sufficiently politically incorrect thing and saying so in public. Some will even curse and spit on the police for trying to protect you.

These people are all around us, some too scared or dull of thinking to do anything other than follow the herd, many others so corrupted by those who taught them and the culture that surrounds them, to be beyond any possible argument, logic, or reason.

They exist only because of the parasite establishment that feeds off the productive members in our society to sustain itself. An establishment that nourishes and protects its members by instilling in them an almost Gnostic hatred for everything that currently exists, and a love of an impossible paradise forever out of reach.

These people are far more deadly to our society than any Islamist; they are the gangrenous limb that kills the body.

Muslim extremists, for all their multitude of faults, at least have the decency to declare themselves the enemies of our society.

Until the many scattered, divided, and often disenchanted tribes to the right of the Australian political landscape find some party, movement or force to coalesce around, these hate-filled haters of hatred will continue with their mission to bully, cow, and intimidate all in our society to bend to their will.

It’s time to stop crawling for praise from people who hate us, time to stop being the “nice” right-winger who is sufficiently left-wing to get invites to be the baited bear on a stacked ABC panel, or the token dissident at an inner-city dinner party.

It’s time to realise just how much these people hate you and everyone like you with every fibre of their being.

It’s time to start fighting back.

Kindness is not taught in our schools. The 'anti-bullying' lessons children get are fixated on pornography and mental illness. 

Not to try to eradicate them but make them normal ! 

While our Institutions are poisoned and intent on poisoning the hearts and minds of the public, we must rely on Individuals to carry the flames of Love and kindness.

Individuals like the gentleman we mentioned earlier. The chap who said of himself.. "I'm sorry my existence is not very noble or sublime."

You would pass him in the street and not recognise him. 

Keanu Reeves. He is a chap. An actor.  A Canadian born in Lebanon.  I quite like him despite his erratic life. Perhaps because of it. He is a thoughtful man, and again, perhaps that is what marks a kind person. He has the makings of a Hero. You do not hear much of him. He does not grab limelight opportunities. He has given away a considerable fortune.

Many have tried to prise things from him in interviews with typically this result....

A conversation with Keanu Reeves is not always easy. He is not overtly obstructive, and he seems to make a huge effort to be polite. But there is an agony involved. For example, I ask him why he acts. For forty-two seconds, he says nothing. Not a word, a grunt, a prevarication, or a hint that an answer might come. For most of that time, his head is angled at ninety degrees away from me, as if that's where the oxygen is.

 http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/the-quiet-man-the-riddle-of-keanu-reeves-20000831?page=2

"Uh," he finally says, "the words that popped into my head were expressionand, uh, it's fun." A few minutes later, I lob a vague question about whether he ever wants to write or direct. He lets out a kind of quiet sigh. At its worst, it's like this. You ask Keanu Reeves a question and . . . just wait. Out in space, planets collide, stars go supernova. On earth, forests fall, animals screech and roar. People shout and rant and weep with anger and joy and just for the hell of it. And, all this time, Reeves sits there, entirely silent.

On this particular occasion, the silence lasts seventy-two seconds.

When the answer arrives, it includes no complete sentences and adds up to a vague, unremarkable, "No, not really."

Later, after communication has become easier but after he has just paused again for an eternity, I ask this: When you take a long time to answer a question, what are you thinking about?

"How to answer it," he says. "In a way that you can understand. In a way that I want to express it."

In this Tavern a chap can sit and sip his pint undisturbed.  But kindnesses are rewarded with kindness, such as his personal disclosure above. 

I sit and pur myself a pint and consider the lessons.


Pax.

Gun Crazy America

Another 'mass shooting'.  Choose one from the last few months. Most seem to be in America (as long as you don't look elsewhere). Some heads shook slowly in the bars, but not in disappointment and censure. Any of that is reserved for the strange and predictable hypocrites who staged a 'sit in' in the hall of Congress in America's drug capital, Washington DC. Against guns: for gun control. Guns, you see, kill people.

They were all Democrats, in a building guarded by people with... yes, Guns.  And would you believe it, 26 of them owned guns !  Hillary Clinton, a renowned anti-gunner - she famously had to run from a non-existent hail of sniper fire in Bosnia - barely steps into the street without ten armed men surrounding her for her 'protection'.  But she wants to disarm you.

President Obama demands gun free zones everywhere but his kids go to school with armed guards. Do yours? 

Read the newspapers and watch the 'entertainment' dished out by the TV and you would be convinced that the average American is a murderous, gun-freak. But what is the actuality?

Close to home, here in the Tavern, our own Southern Gal 'packs heat'. Well, sometimes. She even bought her husband a fine little 9mm for his birthday - or was it Christmas. I don't think she had murder in mind.

Murder, like everything else has to be put into context. Not excused and not blamed on an inanimate object.

But people are killed, some will say. There are 'mass shootings'. Hmmmm. Yes. 

CDC, FBI: Bicycle and Falling Deaths Far Exceed Deaths from 'Mass Shootings'

Death statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) coupled with crime statistics from the FBI show that bicycle and falling deaths far exceed deaths from “mass shootings.”

 http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/10/02/cdc-fbi-bicycle-and-falling-deaths-far-exceed-deaths-from-mass-shootings/

For example, on September 24 the FBI released a study showing there were 64 incidents of “mass killings” (mass shootings) for the years 2000 through 2013. The gunmen in these incidents took the lives of 418 people.

Breitbart News reported that The New York Times and AP jumped all over the study, producing headlines about how “mass shootings” are on the rise and crafting stories that revolved around the attacks at Sandy Hook Elementary and the Aurora movie theater. 

The 418 people who were killed over a 14-year period works out to an average of 29.8 persons a year. 

Remember too that there are well over 300 Million people in the USA. 30 in 300 mil. Do the maths. 

To be clear, no one wants to see even one life lost to tragedy, but the mainstream media’s focus on “mass shootings” to the detriment of other news where hundreds or even thousands more lives were lost is telling. 

For example, the CDC bicycle-related injury report for 2010 shows that almost twice as many people died on bicycles in that one year than were killed in “mass shootings” during the 14 years studied by the FBI.  

Thus, while there were 418 deaths in “mass shootings” from 2000 to 2013, there were 800 deaths by bicycle in 2010 alone.

Moreover, there “were an estimated 515,000 emergency department visits” due to bicycle accidents.

And CDC death statistics for 2010 show there were 26,009 deaths from “falling” for that year alone. That’s right– 26,009 deaths in one year from falls from ladders, counters, roofs, mountains, etc. 

There were an average of 29.8 deaths a year for 14 years from “mass shootings.”.

Still if you can stop just one person from being killed..... you should ban bicycles and forbid falling over. 

Yes, but.... no but.... Oz did it. Innit? 

Indeed Oz did, or John Howard did. In a knee-jerk reaction to a loony setting a world record in shooting 35 people, ordinary Ozfolk were deprived of their guns.  There has not been a mass shooting since. Hmmmm. There hadn't been one before either but heck let's overlook that.

17 Years After Gun Bans in Australia …Police Say Gun Crime is Out of Control

In 1996 Australia unloaded some of the most severe gun bans and gun confiscation programs on record.  And for the guns that were not confiscated gun owners were forced to enter into license agreements and have their guns registered so the government knew what guns everyone had.

Well, they really only knew what guns the law abiding had, since none of the criminals actually followed the program. 

 http://gunsnfreedom.com/17-years-after-gun-bans-in-australia-police-say-gun-crime-is-out-of-control/1010

Fancy that.

Breitbart just reported some interesting developments in Australia that prove all the anti-gun lawmakers wrong.  Gun control does NOT take guns out of the hands of criminals, it only disarms the law abiding, while making everyone less safe.

Because of the out of control crime, Australia law enforcement officials have been forced to carry out recent operations

The New South Wales police commissioner Andrew Scipione had this to say about the spike in gun crime,

“There is no single source of gun violence… guns have fallen into the hands of organized crime, outlaw motorcycle gangs, mid-level crime groups and petty thieves and the lines are often blurred.”

Law abiding, ordinary people don't seem to make the list. 

So it looks like the only ones left with all the guns are the criminals.   

And the gun policies that Australia has enforced are the exact ones that gun control pushers like Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Senator Dianne Feinstein want to see here in the U.S.

Of course they will ignore the real facts behind the issue and overlook the fact that when guns are banned only the police and the criminals will have guns, leaving citizens to fend for themselves when lawlessness like we have seen in Australia starts to rise up.

In the last 12 months alone, over 3,300 people were charged with gun crimes, and over 9,000 guns have been confiscated.

The lesson?  Gun control only [dis]affects the law abiding gun owners.  Criminals are empowered by it.

And where does America and Oz for that matter rank on the world's list of murders? The best measure (as murder is quite a rare occurence) is the number per 100,000 of population per year. 

Bill Whittle gathered those numbers for us. Oh and as we have some Swedish folk who regularly drop by here, Bill has put some sub-titles for you.  

So, let us be mindful.

Fore-warned is (almost) fore-armed.

I have it on authority that Nigel - the big Brexit Fromage - Farage  has suggested that the Great British people should be allowed to own handguns again. 

Blessed are the Peacemakers.

Pax. 

Knights, Warriors and Chivalry

The news of yesterday brought that 'English Spirit' to the fore, with the yoemenry, damsels, gentlemen and wenches of Britain sticking out their tongues at the hoi poloi, the 'elites' in both Europe and Britain and telling them to shove it. 

Many of those modern elites were modern 'knights' like Sir Alan Sugar, Sir Elton John and a host of faux knights whose claims to fame rested on a shore far distant from Honour and Virtue.

Not that the yoemen disliked Knights as such. They had always retained a strong respect for real Knights and the call to Arms that the Unofficial English National Anthem spells out.  A call to serve God and country, in that order. By fighting evil.

Bring me my Bow of burning gold;

Bring me my Arrows of desire:

Bring me my Spear: O clouds unfold!

Bring me my Chariot of fire!

I will not cease from Mental Fight,

Nor shall my Sword sleep in my hand

There is a yearning to recapture those Virtues and Honour which seem sunk under the weight of wet and slimey forces we find outside of the Tavern in Hilary's Village. There is a yearning to find Grace and the source of Goodness. And defend them. Yet we spend so much time in this temporal world bowing to dark forces instead of rising up against them, sword in hand.

So it was that my Lady of the Tavern sat and sipped her Southern Comfort and tasted her dish of Trifle and took the listening customers back in time for some comparisons. She is married to a Knight of today and knows Honour and Virtue. It is 'meet and just' to have a woman's view held up to regard.

The Knight we see in history was a 'God's Man'. First and foremost. He was a Catholic. Despite the good and the bad spoken of Popes and prelates, the Knight owed his allegiences first to God, his Heavenly King, and the Church established by that King of Kings, and then to his earthy King. In those days he considered Kingship to be conferred by God. It was a Divine Office.

And he was a Warrior. A man of Virtue (from the latin, 'manly')

We have few Kings today. We are ruled by one another: 'Representatives'. There is little or no Divine Will in sight. Our political leaders can barely raise an eye to the Cross at the best of occasion and times. Few are even 'manly'.

Socrates viewed the many Virtues as seperable in circumstance, and war was one such circumstance in which a man's 'Virtue' was shown in battle. Courage and Mercy and Justice were paramount on the field, while care and gentleness, kindness and protection of the weak and defenceless were to be exhibited and refined in quite different circumstances. The Knight could display all in the appropriate time and place.  

Let us hear what M'Lady had to say:

"Be strong, and let us fight bravely for our people and the cities of our God. The Lord will do what is good in his sight."   2 Samuel 10:12 

"Blessed be the LORD, my rock,who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle;"  Psalm 144:1

Much has been spoken on many forums about the meaning of knighthood and chivalry.  Its original purpose has been perverted over the years.  The modern use of the word ‘chivalry’ is a pale reflection of what the term once meant. 

 It was something that was never meant for just the supposed  “fairer” or “weaker” sex as it is spoken of so often in our modern culture. 

True Chivalry is gone, no one living now has ever experienced or seen such an ideal.  We only get small glimpses and images of such through stories and books. And from the very minute few who Live It on the battlefield in this modern era (I will give an example on such men later).

During the Middle Ages and in its broadest use it meant the body of knights themselves, and anything concerning them and their role in society.  It was a complex and seemingly contradictory code of behavior to which a knight adhered, and the criteria by which they measured themselves.   

Its was not only a code meant for the battle field but it became an ideal to strive for in all areas on one’s life.  It was a male-only ideology.   

It was a masculine ideal men measured other men by.   

Not all could be a knight: it was something earned and reserved only for the fewest of men.  And these men exhibited wisdom, restraint and justice where it was needed. 

Many knights were believers in our Creator and understood the broader role they were called to in life.  

I had to point out, as some faces turned to me behind the bar in order to see if there was still a vestige of that virtue to be seen etched in my old face, that many were and all were, but of course not all were or are very good at it.  There were bad knights, poorly formed knights; Knights and indeed Kings who made gross errors. There were greedy and avaricious ones too. Much like today ! Thank goodness I have a beard and they do not see my past shames!

To be a warrior for righteous justice is the highest masculine calling.   

A knight understands that war, at times, is necessary,  and evil must be faced head on.  Warriors don’t use what is supposedly “modern” as a justification for an immoral life. They do not seek identity from the mob and they do not make excuses. Warriors are not sheep, such men are set apart.

King Baldwin shows Balian the responsibility he has for his own actions. 

The writing of the fourth century theologian Saint Augustine of Hippo on the subject had a huge impact of the medieval conceptions of the limits of war.  And how chivalry manifested itself on the battlefield.   

He recognized that peace was impossible on earth and that even within Christianity, it was necessary to make a place reserved for war (even within the church).   

Wars were acceptable if they were ‘just’.   

What was considered “just’ to Augustine was war that was acceptable so long as it was primarily a fight for justice and the tranquility of order. To preserve righteousness and preservation of those who could not defend themselves ( the disabled, the weak or those who didn’t have the ability to defend themselves). 

Wars were ‘just’ if one was to right wrongs, or to recover stolen goods.   

If a master or “Lord” declared a war that was unjust then the sin was his. He alone held the responsibility for taking up arms.   

A war that showed needless cruelty to the enemy was a sign that the war was waged for the love of violence rather than one fought for justice.  Beyond the Knight's master he ultimately showed penance to God.  A knight faced evil, he did not flee from it. 

BECOMING A KNIGHT

The modern 21C phrase “white-knighting” is thrown around too loosely in this day and age (especially in men’s forums).  Knights are men who fight injustice, and are very few in number in this modern age.  We need to have a proper understanding of the word and what it truly means to be a knight and to imploy a chivalric code of life before we just start throwing it on those who defend stupidity. 

Defending irresponsible behavior has nothing to do with being a knight or chivalry.   

It is borderline idiotic to even put the two within the same context. Stupidity has nothing to do with “knightly” behavior. 

The three main strands of chivalric ethos - warrior, courtier and Christian – might as we have seen, throw up some contradictions, but the knight was able to ignore these things,  adapting courtly behavior and Christian teaching to fit within the martial ethic.  The one thing all these venues have in common is the strong attraction to knighthood and chivalry, for men especially.

Attractive to men ! Oh, come along now, M'Lady. You know that you just love Knights too ! Hahaha. Your husband-Knight bathes in your warm gaze. And I appreciate your occasional modest glance  too. I have seen you admiring my old Black armour (with all the Kingly gold and silver bits) hanging on the wall. 

Both the title and the rite-of-passage it represents a core need that today's society no longer meets, despite its technological wealth and myriad distractions.. 

What is that need?

It focuses on self-identity. Generally speaking, men inherently need to be recognized as people of value and accomplishment by their community. 

The title of knight provides just this kind of recognition. In most cultures, and throughout history, the passage from boy-to-man meant more than just a matter of age and physical development. It meant earning the status of being a "man," someone who represents the very best values of one's community. 

A knights oath went much deeper than women, it had very little to do with women at all.  So why are people perverting the meaning of chivalry and knighthood?   

What did it ever have to do with defending stupidity or leftism? 

A knight defends truth, a warrior defends what is honorable.  Defending the weak was only a very small part of a knight’s oath.   To a certain degree it is acted out  in this scene that I can show you.  We see it here being passed down from father to son.  But even this only gives us a small glimpse of what it truly entailed.

What knighthood and chivalry ultimately represents is FREEDOM. While a knight may live his life to a higher purpose or calling or seek to preserve the welfare of others he is by no means anyone’s  slave.  A true warrior knight seeks out truth and goodness and to preserve such things during his lifetime.  He bows to no one but God but advises and listens to all.  

As you can see I am a fan of the movie “Kingdom of Heaven”.  

A fine Hollywood depiction which gives little regard to historical accuracy and indeed occasionally disregards the basics of chivalry itself. But quite a spectacle as a film. 

King Baldwin in particular fascinated me.   

How could a man so young be so wise?  He was a humble warrior king. From what is written about him many say he was a spiritual man, he was a leader and a student. Willing to lead and willing to learn and listen.   Such leaders are scarce nowadays.  Many say he was steadfast in battle, strong, brave and also just and fair.

The age was included in the long, long time described as violent, nasty, brutish and short', by Hobbes.  Most of human history in fact. We seem to have forgotten not only that age but how recent it was that it ended. We only need to look over our shoulder at the 18c and 19C. Admiral Lord Nelson was a mere boy of 14 when he commanded a ship that had been captured and sailed it back to port. We do not challenge boys to grow up these days. We wrap them in slime and denigrate them. 

Baldwin was 12 when he ascended to the Throne of Jerusalem. He was a 'minor' King under alliegence to Richard of England. He fought a major battle, well, at 16.  Who would put a 16 year old in charge of an army these days? Kings led from the front back then. Princes too. Today the only Princes we see in battle-gear are the British ones. Tradition demands!  Baldwin is rightly acknowledged here as Heroic.

Modern society obsessively avoids suffering, risk and danger. It secures everything with seatbelts and safety rails, air conditions the summer heat, prints warnings on coffee cups and advises that that safety glasses should be used while working with hammers. Certainly such precautions have prevented misfortune.   

On the other hand it has made a society that has become much too comfortable and complacent.   

Freedom is not preserved by safety nets. Heroism and excellence are not born out of such comfort, they are from confronting rather than avoiding suffering and peril. The mania for safeguards has also diminished the notion of these qualities. 

This is unfortunate since only those intrepid souls who confront danger, endure suffering and overcome obstacles merit mention in the annals of history. A shining example is the leper king, Baldwin IV of Jerusalem.  He did not allow his illness to cripple him.  Maybe his illness gave him a stronger drive to reach excellence as he knew his time on earth would be cut short.  

Intellectually and physically gifted as a boy, he was well equipped to inherit the Crusader kingdom. This is how chronicler and royal tutor William of Tyre described his childhood:

And here we read a prime presage of a Mandy Rice Davies moment*.

“He made good progress in his studies and as time passed he grew up full of hope and developed his natural abilities. He was a good-looking child for his age and more skilled than men who were older than himself in controlling horses and in riding them at a gallop. He had an excellent memory and he loved listening to stories.” 

* (Well he would say that, wouldn't he). 

Although this king's life was cut short by a life crippling disease.  History has a way of remembering men like Baldwin. And the knights who come after him will continue to be remembered.  Such men always are remembered. 

The earth takes their bodies, but their spirits and legacy is never forgotten and still live on today.   

A knight's life is not one of insignificance. 

Knighthood is a title of honor to be cherished not mocked. 

 It is a title not easily given, it is battle tested and EARNED. It is challenging, something to protect and not bequeathed lightly. The candidate must be a self-liberated soul, dedicated to truth, compassionate toward others and loyal to his Companions.   

So why does this title get thrown around so loosely?  Save this honor for those who have earned it and exhibit such behavior.  It should not be used as a perverted form of mockery as it was never intended to be so.  To participate in such behavior is to discredit the freedom fighters who have given their lives in defense of honor, justice and truth.

The modern knight still wears armor (though it looks much different now than it did many years ago). He still fights for justice, truth, and honor.  He still holds these principles true to himself and his heart even if the modern society doesn’t see value in them.  The culture does not deter him from fighting for his principles. 

His purpose is to respond to life as life presents itself to him. 

And he responds morally. 

He acts. He speaks out. He is courteous but truthful to everyone. He presents an appropriate image of knighthood, that others might be inspired by his integrity.  He is not perfect, but when he makes mistakes he takes responsibility for them and LEARNS from them. True knighthood will always see value in these things.   

We see small glimpses of him from time to time in this modern age.  These knights and warriors inspire other men. They  faced evil and have defeated it.  Men such as these, we would do well to listen and learn from.  This knight sees the world as it is rather than catering to an illusion.

This warrior, Jocko Willink, eschews the idea of 'converting the infidel'. 

That is someone else's job. 

A Knight may parlay, he might meet his enemy on the field before battle and state his terms, but he is not there as a diplomat.  

A Knight's job on the battlefield is to kill.

This is what puts some less knowledgable people off. They just do not understand.

A King and Knight can serve Grace in the Tavern. You need have no fear of him.

Love your enemy is an instruction given to us directly by Christ, the Son of God, the Second Person of the Divine Trinity.  We must acknowledge our enemy as being made in the Image and Likeness of God. But in so many cases our enemy has been possessed by Evil and we must use all human ingenuity and power as well as Divine Grace to defeat him. 

It is a tough balancing act.

Pray for your enemy's soul; over his dead body, as needed.

Ephesians 6:13

Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm.

Luke 22:36

He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one".

Psalm 18:39

For you equipped me with strength for the battle; you made those who rise against me sink under me.

2 Timothy 2:4

No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him.

A Catholic Knight is enlisted at Confirmation as a Warrior of Christ.

I keep my sword behind the bar.

Now join her in raising a tankard to Knights and their return.

I mentioned Hollywood's peculiar slants earlier. The film that Southern Gal likes so much is quite enjoyable for an action movie with benefits but as I said it has its good and bad aspects.

You might like to take a little time to look at an Historian's view. He clearly dislkes the film on a number of grounds but some of his points have merit. I will pour some drinks while you shout at him as he presents his case. 

So, some points to ponder.

There was another more 'modern' (in fact yet to happen) scenario of invasion and the repulse by brave Knights of the Sky. 'Independence Day - Resurgence'. A very jaundiced eye was cast over it showing just how far Hollywood can sink - in its attempts to strip all virtue from the hero. And 'strip' seems to be the word!

I shall leave you with the virtuous lady's views above to keep in mind.

Pax

June 24th 2016: Independence Day

The runner with the cleft stick burst through the door with a big grin. He'd read the note.

A New Independence Day goes on the anniversary calendar. The day that Britain decided to leave the disaster zone that is the EU.

It has been a longish while since since Britain thought it a 'good idea at the time' to join a Common Market.  That idea was defended by assurances that a trading zone would NOT turn into some political overlord. But what did happen? The unelected bureaucrats dominated and attempted to destroy the Sovereignty of Great Britain.

Worse, those unelected ruled as a Politburo on a Soviet model.

The British are patient people. They suffered in silence for a while as the fat cats and traitors sucked off the EU teat; a milk and honey pot that was continually topped up by the taxes of British people who were given no say whatsoever in the transfers. But eventually they have said....

ENOUGH

Yes, V for Victory with our two bow-string fingers.

The fingers (or even just one) can be turned around now at the Eurocrats who will be crapping their pants this night. The French will have their Frexit plans boosted. The Swiss have already shelved their plans to join.

The spirit of Winnie the Churchill will smile. The night is still dark and the threats and prognostications of doom and woe still ring in our ears from the traitor's lips. And we shall look to a bright dawn. Their lies and disdain will not be forgotten. Their lack of faith and confidence in Britain will be remembered. 

It is time to heal the disasters of the past and bring the Anglosphere back together as a Force.

By the Lord Harry it is needed.

But traitors and ne'er-do-wells will need to work hard to gain forgiveness. They have denigrated Britain. They have rubbished the ability of Britain to 'survive' outside the farcical EU. Britain with its 1000 year history of greatness; Britain who gave Europe and the world its Charters of Freedoms: Britain who devised and led the Industrial Revolution that brought the world's nations into Prosperity; Britain that created and held the largest and most successful and benign Empire that the world has ever seen; Britain that stood entirely alone against the same National Socialist aggression that crippled Europe; Britain that paved the road to the liberation of Europe with a million bodies.

The traitors refused to see any of that. They do not believe in Britain.

They do not deserve to 'remain' on Britain's shores.

Let them go to 'Europe'.

Gentlemen, Ladies, Squires, farm boys, wenches and sundry damsels, the drinks are on the house.

Pax.