"Children tend not to enjoy hectoring"

From "Kids Deserve Beautiful Books":

By now perhaps you’ve heard that America’s children aren’t interested in reading and aren’t capable of digesting books befitting their grade levels. A litany of articles and national report cards testify to the crisis. But the fight for young minds is being lost even earlier than most appreciate and long before a child sets foot in a school.

The first frontier is children’s literature: chapter, picture and even board books. There are thousands of children’s books that train the ear in language and form the moral imagination, narratives that help children place themselves in the larger human story. But many are now hard to find, and most of the latest titles can be fairly described as awful. ....

American families do still read some good books to young children. But it’s typical now in bookstores to find children’s books browbeating kids about why Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a girlboss or how all the animals will soon be extinct because of human rapaciousness. One title I encountered recently at a store was about an ocelot separated from another cat by an evil wall on the southern border.

The nation’s most prestigious honor for children’s literature, the Randolph Caldecott Medal, once went to powerhouse titles like The Little House and Chanticleer and the Fox, the latter a spin on the Canterbury Tales. In 2024, the winner was an “emotional exploration of being big in a world that prizes small.” In 2021, the Caldecott went to a tale about how “water is the first medicine.” ....

The books aren’t compelling. They teach through lectures about self-confidence or managing emotions, instead of rich stories that stir a heart to ponder characters and lessons. Children tend not to enjoy hectoring, and who can blame them? ....

Alas, most public libraries have abandoned their role in providing equitable access to excellent books. My local library features staff book lists for children, and what’s on offer? Books on “divorce and separation”; books on “mindfulness for kids”; “Feelings: Shelf-Help for Littles”; “funny picture books to make you LOL.” There’s also a list dedicated to gender issues and identities for “younger readers,” including a book about a kid who “has always been a boy, even if the world sees him as a girl.” ....

This Christmas, I’m reading aloud to my family perhaps the best story for children ever written, published 75 years ago this fall: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis. I figured the falling snow outside was an evocative moment to invite the children to imagine a world where it’s “always winter but never Christmas.”

Wardrobe is a masterpiece precisely because it doesn’t hammer readers with a simple lesson or obsess over the inner emotional monologues of the four protagonist children, even as they encounter a sometimes frightening world. There’s more to absorb in that short story about emotional courage, justice and a healthy sense of identity than you’ll ever find in today’s hackneyed books for children. (more, but likely behind a paywall)

Kate B. Odell, "Kids Deserve Beautiful Books," The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 22, 2025.

A journey to faith

From another review of Charles Murray's Taking Religion Seriously:

At the heart of Murray’s argument are two points that I find particularly compelling. Like Cardinal Newman and C.S. Lewis (from whom Murray draws abundantly), Murray believes that there is a nonarbitrary “Moral Law” manifest in human conscience that reveals the nature of good and evil and encourages us to “do the right thing.” With Lewis’s help, Murray sees through facile moral and cultural relativism. Even in the midst of genuine diversity of mores and practices, what Lewis called “the Tao” can still be seen. Where on earth have an entire people or culture esteemed in principle faithlessness over loyalty, murder over the obligation not to kill, falsehood over truth, cowardice over courage, rank selfishness over the common good? No, all human cultures at their core see themselves as morally bound and morally guided. ....

Murray has therefore arrived at a position that is not merely theistic but genuinely Christian. With due modesty, he has come to believe that we live in an “intentional universe” and have access to a binding “moral bedrock” amid the chaos of “tumultuous changes in the secular received wisdom about what is right and wrong, good and evil.” He has also come to believe in the reality of sin, as well as in the life-transforming “forgiveness of sins” through the offices of a just and merciful God as proclaimed and made manifest by Jesus Christ. Given Murray’s personal starting point and scientific credentials, the witness of his journey to faith is all the more winsome. One could see him as the antitype and antidote to those, like Richard Dawkins, who speak of a “universe of ‘no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.’” (more)

Daniel J. Mahoney, "Charles Murray, in Good Faith," National Review, Dec. 18, 2025.

Character counts

I liked this review of History Matters, a collection of David McCullough's essays and speeches on the subject.

Many, if not all, of the chapters in this book reinforce the message of the title: History Matters. Along with the ways in which history is important to the body politic, McCullough always emphasizes the personal ways in which we are all enriched by history. For example, in 1995 remarks, he told an audience: “I’m convinced that history encourages, as nothing else does, a sense of proportion about life, gives us a sense of the relative scale of our own brief time on earth and how valuable that is.” This book is a cri de coeur for a discipline too often neglected by undergraduates. The rise in historical illiteracy was very concerning to McCullough....

Again and again, we see the importance of character for McCullough. It was not only seemingly one of his criteria for writing a biography, but it is perhaps the chief lesson he hopes we will draw from history. He writes that “character counts in the presidency more than any other single quality. It is more important than how much the president knows of foreign policy or economics, or even about politics.” McCullough once began working on a biography of Picasso, but ceased his labors because Picasso was not an admirable person. In contrast, McCullough was well-known for his admiration of Harry Truman, Abigail Adams, and George Washington, among others. ....

In all his work, David McCullough’s approach to the past demonstrated the possibility of clear-sighted patriotism. Not every American was a hero, Trumbull’s paintings were inaccurate, George Washington’s false teeth included the teeth of other people, Teddy Roosevelt’s childhood asthma attacks were likely caused by anxiety—but you can still respect character when you see it and appreciate courage and believe in values that can transcend times. You do not have to deny that Harry Truman had ties to the Pendergast machine in order to appreciate Truman’s strengths. This clear-sighted patriotism is why McCullough could maintain some optimism about America’s future. The good parts of our past were not built on perfect people. .... (more)

Elizabeth Stice, "Why History Matters," Mere Orthodoxy, Dec. 19, 2025.

God bless you, every one!

 

Remembering Christmas past

From Dickens' Pickwick Papers.

...[N]umerous indeed are the hearts to which Christmas brings a brief season of happiness and enjoyment. How many families, whose members have been dispersed and scattered far and wide, in the restless struggles of life, are then reunited, and meet once again in that happy state of companionship and mutual goodwill, which is a source of such pure and unalloyed delight; and one so incompatible with the cares and sorrows of the world, that the religious belief of the most civilised nations, and the rude traditions of the roughest savages, alike number it among the first joys of a future condition of existence, provided for the blessed and happy! How many old recollections, and how many dormant sympathies, does Christmas time awaken!

We write these words now, many miles distant from the spot at which, year after year, we met on that day, a merry and joyous circle. Many of the hearts that throbbed so gaily then, have ceased to beat; many of the looks that shone so brightly then, have ceased to glow; the hands we grasped, have grown cold; the eyes we sought, have hid their lustre in the grave; and yet the old house, the room, the merry voices and smiling faces, the jest, the laugh, the most minute and trivial circumstances connected with those happy meetings, crowd upon our mind at each recurrence of the season, as if the last assemblage had been but yesterday! Happy, happy Christmas, that can win us back to the delusions of our childish days; that can recall to the old man the pleasures of his youth; that can transport the sailor and the traveler, thousands of miles away, back to his own fireside and his quiet home! ....

Charles Dickens, The Pickwick Papers, Chapter 28.

If we don't believe, what is it we disbelieve?

From Dorothy L. Sayers, "The Greatest Drama Ever Staged":

.... What think ye of Christ? Before we adopt any of the unofficial solutions (some of which are indeed excessively dull)—before we dismiss Christ as a myth, an idealist, a demagogue, a liar or a lunatic—it will do no harm to find out what the creeds really say about Him. What does the Church think of Christ?

The Church's answer is categorical and uncompromising, and it is this: That Jesus Bar-Joseph, the carpenter of Nazareth, was in fact and in truth, and in the most exact and literal sense of the words, the God "by Whom all things were made." His body and brain were those of a common man; His personality was the personality of God, so far as that personality could be expressed in human terms. He was not a kind of dæmon or fairy pretending to be human; He was in every respect a genuine living man. He was not merely a man so good as to be "like God"—He was God.

Now, this is not just a pious commonplace; it is not commonplace at all. For what it means is this, among other things: that for whatever reason God chose to make man as he is—limited and suffering and subject to sorrows and death—He had the honesty and the courage to take His own medicine. Whatever game He is playing with His creation, He has kept His own rules and played fair. He can exact nothing from man that He has not exacted from Himself. He has Himself gone through the whole of human experience, from the trivial irritations of family life and the cramping restrictions of hard work and lack of money to the worst horrors of pain and humiliation, defeat, despair and death. When He was a man, He played the man. He was born in poverty and died in disgrace and thought it well worth while. ....

Now, nobody is compelled to believe a single word of this remarkable story. God (says the Church) has created us perfectly free to disbelieve in Him as much as we choose. If we do disbelieve, then He and we must take the consequences in a world ruled by cause and effect. The Church says further, that man did, in fact, disbelieve, and that God did, in fact, take the consequences. All the same, if we are going to disbelieve a thing, it seems on the whole to be desirable that we should first find out what, exactly, we are disbelieving. Very well, then: "The right Faith is, that we believe that Jesus Christ is God and Man. Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Who although He be God and Man, yet is He not two, but one Christ." There is the essential doctrine, of which the whole elaborate structure of Christian faith and morals is only the logical consequence. ....

Dorothy L. Sayers, "The Greatest Drama Ever Staged," Creed or Chaos? 1938.

"Just another Mary"

From The Wall Street Journal a few years ago:

The first person ever to hear that Jesus is the Son of God was a low-income teenage girl in an obscure backwater of the Roman empire. She went by the most common name for Jewish women of her time and place: She was just another Mary. But then she claimed an angel had appeared to her and told her she would give birth to the Son of God. From the perspective of both Jews and Romans in the first century A.D., her story was completely unbelievable. How has it lasted for 2,000 years?

Today, Mary’s claim to have met an angel is part of what makes her story hard to believe. We imagine angels like the fairy on top of the Christmas tree, only bigger, so Mary’s story feels like a fairy tale. But angels in the Bible aren’t remotely fairylike. They’re terrifying messengers from God. ....

“Do not be afraid, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end!” (Luke 1:30-33).

.... Doubtless Mary had a lot of questions for the angel, but she asked just one: “How will this be, since I’m a virgin?” Mary knew the facts of life. The title “Son of God” could technically just have meant the Messiah. Perhaps she thought that Joseph, her betrothed, would be the father of this longed-for King. But then the angel dropped another bomb:

“The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God” (Luke 1:35).

.... But why would God become a man? Why would he live in poverty and die in agony? Why would the King of all creation come not to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many? According to the Christian story, it was because of love for every human being, rich or poor, weak or strong, enslaved or free. He paid the price for human sin—a word we may not choose to use but a reality we hit upon when we bewail injustice in this world and wonder why it seems so hard to fix. Christians believe that the Son of God was born to die, so that all who trust in him could live as sons and daughters of God—wrapped up more tightly in his love than the newborn Jesus was wrapped up by Mary in his swaddling clothes.

When Mary met the angel, she was a no-name girl from a disempowered people in a seemingly inconsequential place. Today, if you worry that you might be insignificant—unknown, unloved and unimportant in this world—perhaps this Christmas you will hear her message with fresh ears. If she was right about her son, then you are worth the birth and life and death and resurrection of the Son of God. (more)

Rebecca McLaughlin, "When Mary Met the Angel," The Wall Street Journal, Dec. 24, 2022.

Sabbath

Before his murder, I had paid little attention to Charlie Kirk. I largely dismissed him as just another part of Trump world. So I was surprised to learn that the book he wrote during his final year was non-political and about the Sabbath. An excerpt was recently published at The Free Press, introduced by his wife, who wrote, "...the Sabbath is the one commandment that if you choose not to do it, you are the one who’s missing out on the blessing. Not God. Even if you don’t believe in God, you still have to rest." From "Charlie Kirk’s Final Message to America":

If taking one day off makes you anxious or ashamed, then you must ask, What am I really worshipping? No idol condemns rest like the idol of productivity. This is the golden calf of the modern age. We bow to output, chase metrics, and sacrifice our joy on the altar of efficiency.

But our identity must be anchored in something far greater than toil. Work is good—it reflects God’s creative nature. But rest is holy—it reflects His sufficiency. The same God who calls us to labor for six days also commands us to rest for one. That’s not weakness; that’s worship. ....

In Exodus, we’re called to rest because God rested. In Deuteronomy, we’re commanded to rest because only slaves work without stopping. God links Sabbath to freedom. To resist the Sabbath is, in essence, to flirt with slavery again—not the kind imposed by Pharaoh, but the kind we willingly chain ourselves to through unrelenting busyness, performance, and obligation. ....

Rest is not about perfection—it’s about intention. The goal isn’t to follow a legalistic rule, but to cultivate a sacred rhythm of freedom and trust. Sabbath is not a burden. It’s a gift. And like all good gifts, it requires humility to receive and courage to protect. ....

We’ve been conditioned to believe that our worth is tied to our availability, our output, our visibility. But Sabbath teaches us that your value is not measured by your responsiveness or productivity. It’s measured by your belonging—your rootedness in God’s love.

When you power down your phone, you’re not “missing out.” You’re entering a different kind of time, what the rabbis call “sacred time.” Time that doesn’t drain you but restores you. You begin to see things more clearly—your thoughts settle, your heart slows, your conversations deepen. And most importantly, you remember who you are apart from the endless stream of noise.

Don’t be afraid to turn off your phone. You’re not falling behind—you’re catching up to what matters most. The people in front of you. The presence of God. The peace you’ve been craving. .... (more)

Charlie Kirk and Erika Kirk, "Charlie Kirk’s Final Message to America," The Free Press, Dec. 8, 2025.

St. Nick

Of all the portrayals of the modern St. Nicholas,  Santa Claus — this is my favorite. From the cover of St. Nicholas magazine, December, 1916:

The GOP and MAGA

I've been interested in politics since I was in elementary school. I studied politics in college and graduate school. I taught high school students politics and international relations for thirty-five years. So I've been interested in the study of the subject, but also involved in the practice of it for a long time. Less so for the last ten years or so. I consider myself a Reagan conservative. That means I'm not at home in today's GOP. Nick Catoggio in "The Invaders" describes two GOP factions, with one of which I am not comfortable. The other worries me even more:

Broadly speaking, the current GOP coalition consists of two groups, according to the Manhattan Institute report. Roughly two-thirds of the party are “Core Republicans,” loyalists who’ve been voting for Team Red since Trump’s first run in 2016 or earlier. But a sizable minority of 29 percent are “New Entrants,” people who voted Republican for president for the first time only recently.

Those groups have very different beliefs.

Not about everything. Both strongly support Trump, both favor “peace through strength,” both want to deport illegal immigrants, both overwhelmingly think Western society is too “feminine.” But on practically everything else, the latecomers to the party are conspicuously distinct. And not in a good way: “The … New Entrant bloc is more likely to express tolerance for racist or antisemitic speech, more likely to support political violence, more conspiratorial, and—on core policy questions—considerably more liberal than the party’s traditional base.”

One of the splashiest results came when respondents were asked about common conspiracy theories involving six topics: the 2020 election, the September 11 attacks, the moon landing, the Holocaust, whether vaccines cause autism, and whether COVID leaked from a lab. Among Core Republicans, just 11 percent believe in at least five of those six. Among New Entrants, 34 percent do.

The gap was even wider on the question of whether political violence is sometimes justified. Core Republicans split 20-80; New Entrants split … 54-46. The newbies are also far more prone to hold prejudiced opinions (or to admit it, at least). Fully 32 percent cop to expressing racist views versus 8 percent in the Core Republican group. Reading that might lead you to assume that New Entrants are a horde of Bircher-type radical reactionaries galvanized by Trump’s ascendance in the GOP. Not so. They’re actually more likely than Core Republicans to support increasing high-skilled immigration and less likely to favor deporting illegals; banning diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives; and fighting for “traditional values.” They’re far more liberal on whether children should be eligible to receive transgender medical procedures, with 49 percent opposed to the practice versus 83 percent of Core Republicans. And they’re much more likely to favor raising taxes over cutting spending, splitting 48-47 on that question compared to 26-71 among longtime party stalwarts.

All told, compared to traditional conservatives, they’re a considerably better bet to be kooks, bigots, and, er, progressive. They’re also “younger, more racially diverse, and more likely to have voted for Democratic candidates in the recent past,” in the Manhattan Institute’s words. .... (more)

Nick Catoggio, "The Invaders," The Dispatch, Dec. 5, 2025.

I'm back

After a series of very expensive mistakes with my computer—all of which were due to my not knowing the consequences of the choices I made—I am in the process of rebuilding, restoring, and carefully reinstalling various pieces of software. I lost almost all of my Windows documents, unless there is a backup somewhere I haven't yet found. And I'm having to re-collect my email Contacts list. I fear I have lost connections that I value. I've learned a lot, not least having become aware of all the things I can do on my phone in the absence of a PC.

"Christian Zionism"

I have several good friends who are, or at least once were, Dispensationalists in their theological framework. I'm not and, consequently, not a "Christian Zionist." But I am a Christian and a strong supporter of the American alliance with Israel. The Christian theologian who wrote "Is ‘Christian Zionism’ Really Heretical?" doesn't believe it is heresy, but also doesn't think that the question is relevant to whether Christians ought to support Israel. The issue arose because of a recent interview Tucker Carlson did with an anti-Semite during which Carlson made the assertion that support for Israel was heretical. That controversy led to, among other things, dissension within the erstwhile conservative Heritage Foundation, during which a young female staffer said, "...Gen Z has an increased unfavorable view of Israel, and it’s not because millions of Americans are antisemitic. It’s because we are Catholic and Orthodox and believe that Christian Zionism is a modern heresy."

.... This undoubtedly sincere statement raises a number of worthy and important questions that are, sadly, wrapped up in an obvious and distracting fallacy. The young woman’s generation has increasing antipathy to Israel, she says, because “Christian Zionism is a modern heresy.” But what has Israel to do with a modern Christian heresy? Has the state of Israel ever embraced or promoted or associated itself with Christian Zionism, other than to accept enthusiastic support wherever it can be found, particularly when in short supply? ....

The staffer’s complaint, then, is that if some segment of people support Israel for the wrong reasons, Israel is thereby unworthy of support. This embarrassing non sequitur does not speak well of the generation for whom she claimed to speak. People support right and good things for wrong and bad reasons all the time, and the wrong and bad reasons do not transform the right and good thing suddenly into wrong and bad. Her logic is so transparently poor that less charitable readers might view this public objection to “Christian Zionism” as a red herring to distract from what actually is just antisemitism. Alas, as much as one might wish that this uncharitable reading did not have good support, it is exactly what the likes of Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson are doing when they rail against “Christian Zionists.” The epithet is a cloaking device for conspiratorial hatred of Jews. ....

...Christianity does maintain that national Israel’s covenant purposes and function have been put out of gear, retired, made obsolete in terms of redemptive-historical significance, but this is not what is often derided as “replacement” theology. Properly understood, it is fulfillment theology. [N.T.] Wright, again: “[T]o distinguish between a signpost and the building to which it points is not to say anything derogatory about the signpost." Much less is it to say anything derogatory about Jewish people. That anyone would abuse these doctrines in service of antisemitism is an affront to the Christian gospel, which, Christians believe, is for Jews and Gentiles alike. ....

If a Christian comes to understand and believe that the state of Israel no longer has redemptive-historical significance, the question is then disentangled from needless and distorting religious baggage and put squarely back into its proper domain. Nobody asks the religious rationale for why we should be allies with Canada. That is a matter of international relations, not biblical exegesis. What is its form of government? Do its citizens enjoy civil liberties and the rule of law? Do they share our moral values? Believe in human dignity? Is there freedom of speech, religion, press, and association? These are the relevant considerations—and the Jewish people and their state would be only too happy to be judged by them instead of the double standards to which they’ve become sadly accustomed. Like the Heritage staffer, I am a Christian, a theologian even, and I agree that Christian Zionism in the form of Dispensational theology is a terrible reason to support Israel. Unlike her and her Gen Z compatriots, I can spot a non sequitur and therefore I can also see the many good reasons to support Israel. (more)

Brian G. Mattson, "Is ‘Christian Zionism’ Really Heretical?" The Dispatch, Nov. 23, 2025.

"In memory, it’s all in black and white."

Many of us who were alive on November 22, 1963, had experiences similar to Patrick Kurp's:

No public event has shaken me so lastingly as the assassination of President Kennedy. I’m not speaking sentimentally, mourning the glory that was Camelot. JFK was a mediocre president, at best, and not a good man.

I had turned eleven a month before his murder. The killing taught me that everyone was vulnerable, even the most powerful and protected man in the world. I don’t mean that in the personal sense. I haven’t spent the last sixty-two years trembling with paranoia. I’m talking about history. No one is immune to its machinations. Few things last.

The way I learned of the assassination seems significant. Ron Ornsby and I were in the same sixth-grade class and had walked to our Safety Patrol post, carrying our flags and wearing Sam Browne belts. A driver stopped to tell us the president had been shot. ....

When I walked in the back door at home, I could see the silhouette of my mother crying in front of the television. For the next three days, we were forbidden to play outside and spent most of the time watching the news from Dallas and Washington, D.C. In memory, it’s all in black and white. ....

I was a high school senior that year. I was home because that was the day of my grandmother's funeral. We learned of the assassination from a television broadcast just before leaving to go to the church. We didn't know the President was dead until after my grandmother's interment. The lady who drove us to the cemetery stayed in the car, listening to the radio. When we got home, I called the school. I learned later that there had been crying in the halls and classrooms. The band from my high school had marched in JFK's inaugural parade.

Some time later, I learned that C.S. Lewis had also died on that day.

Patrick Kurp, "'But O the Heavy Change, Now Thou Art Gone'," Anecdotal Evidence, Nov. 22, 2025.

Grace

Frederick Buechner:

AFTER CENTURIES OF handling and mishandling, most religious words have become so shopworn nobody's much interested any more. Not so with grace, for some reason. Mysteriously, even derivatives like gracious and graceful still have some of the bloom left.

Grace is something you can never get but only be given. There's no way to earn it or deserve it or bring it about any more than you can deserve the taste of raspberries and cream or earn good looks or bring about your own birth.

A good sleep is grace and so are good dreams. Most tears are grace. The smell of rain is grace. Somebody loving you is grace. Loving somebody is grace. Have you ever tried to love somebody?

A crucial eccentricity of the Christian faith is the assertion that people are saved by grace. There's nothing you have to do. There's nothing you have to do. There's nothing you have to do.

The grace of God means something like: Here is your life. You might never have been but you are because the party wouldn't have been complete without you. Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid. I am with you. Nothing can ever separate us. It's for you I created the universe. I love you.

There's only one catch, Like any other gift, the gift of grace can be yours only if you'll reach out and take it.

Maybe being able to reach out and take it is a gift too.

From the entry for October 30 in Frederick Buechner, Listening to Your Life, HarperCollins, 1992.

"Like a tree planted by the water-side"

From a 1971 W.H. Auden letter critical of liturgical reform:

As for the Psalms, they are poems, and to 'get' poetry, it should, of course, be read in the language in which it was written. I myself, alas, know no Hebrew. All I know is that Coverdale reads like poetry, and the modern versions don't.

Coverdale's version of the Psalms is the version used in the Book of Common Prayer.

Coverdale's Psalm 1:

1. BLESSED is the man that hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners : and hath not sat in the seat of the scornful.
2. But his delight is in the law of the Lord : and in his law will he exercise himself day and night.
3. And he shall be like a tree planted by the water-side : that will bring forth his fruit in due season.
4. His leaf also shall not wither : and look, whatsoever he doeth, it shall prosper.
5. As for the ungodly, it is not so with them : but they are like the chaff, which the wind scattereth away from the face of the earth.
6. Therefore the ungodly shall not be able to stand in the judgement : neither the sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
7. But the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous : and the way of the ungodly shall perish.

liturgical reform – Snakes and Ladders

Lest we forget

On the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month in 1918, an armistice ended combat between the armed forces of the Allied Powers and Imperial Germany. The day is observed variously as Armistice Day, Veterans Day, or Remembrance Day. It is a day to honor all veterans, living or dead. When I was in elementary school, the class paused for a minute of silence at eleven o'clock.

Inklings

From "88 Years of Middle-Earth, 75 Years of Narnia":

During the hectic middle decades of the twentieth century, from the end of the Great Depression through World War II and into the 1950s, a small circle of intellectuals gathered on a weekly basis in and around Oxford University to drink, smoke, quip, cavil, read aloud their works in progress, and endure or enjoy with as much grace as they could muster the sometimes blistering critiques that followed. This erudite club included writers and painters, philologists and physicians, historians and theologians, soldiers and actors. They called themselves, with typical self-effacing humor, the Inklings. ....

Just before the dawn of World War II, 88 years ago, one of the members of this group, John Ronald Reuel Tolkien (better known as J.R.R. Tolkien), published a quaint little fantasy book for children entitled The Hobbit on September 21, 1937. It was followed by a trilogy of books beginning in 1954 called The Lord of the Rings....

Thirteen years later, John’s good friend Clive Staples Lewis (better known as C.S. Lewis) and fellow Inkling published an even quainter children’s book entitled The Chronicles of Naria: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe 75 years ago on October 16, 1950. It was followed by 5 sequels and 1 prequel. There is a new set of movies to be adapted for Netflix in which filming has already begun for the sixth published book, but the first in the series, The Magician’s Nephew. ....

...[B]ooks, articles, and videos have been made about the overt and subtle Christianity packed into the books Tolkien and Lewis have created. Middle-earth has been around for 88 years and Narnia for 75. ....

I don't think that The Magician's Nephew ought to be the first in the Netflix series, even though CSL himself recommended that as the proper reading order. There are also rumors that Aslan is to be voiced by Merrill Streep! Nevertheless, when the Netflix series comes, I will hope for the best.

Mark Wilson, "88 Years of Middle-Earth, 75 Years of Narnia," Catholic Bard, Nov 8, 2025.

Against domination

Joseph Loconte on one of the reasons Tolkien and Lewis remain relevant beyond just entertainment:

.... Tolkien and Lewis made a literary pact between them: They would write novels to undeceive their generation and quicken the moral imagination. ....

The result, The Screwtape Letters (1942), exposed how fear, hatred, and ambition could be manipulated to serve the lust for power. The devil and his minions want people “hag-ridden” by the future, Lewis writes, “haunted by visions of imminent heaven or hell on earth.” Once individuals become obsessed with controlling the future, they will be “ready to break the Enemy’s commands [God’s moral law] in the present” in order to attain the one or avoid the other.

Art was imitating life. To defeat capitalism and achieve its utopian vision of a classless society, freed from the vices of envy and competition, Soviet communism waged a war against its own population: the abolition of private property, show trials, executions, and gulags. To prevent “the bacillus of mankind” from polluting and destroying German society, Hitler launched his “final solution” against the Jews: the ghettos, the deportations, the sterilization policies, and the death camps.

Thus, the dictatorships of the left and the right — political religions without God — each claimed to be the solution to an approaching apocalypse. Each demanded unquestioned loyalty to their political agendas. As Tolkien described Sauron: “He brooked no freedom nor any rivalry, and he named himself Lord of the Earth.” ....

Their most beloved stories — The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, The Ransom Trilogy, The Chronicles of Narnia — upheld the irreducible dignity of the individual. Against the literary establishment, they reclaimed the concept of heroism and reinvented it for the modern mind: Their unlikely protagonists include the children of Narnia and the homely inhabitants of the Shire. As Gandalf described the hobbits: “Soft as butter they can be, yet sometimes as tough as old tree-roots.”

During the crisis years of 1933 to 1945, when the world descended into an abyss of grievances, propaganda, and state-sanctioned violence, J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis stood together in the breach. They offered a vision of human life — rooted in a deeply Christian outlook — that embraced humility, self-denial, and the rejection of worldly power. .... (more)

Joseph Loconte, "Lessons About Power from Middle-earth," National Review, Nov. 8, 2025.

"It's not gonna rain forever"

Randy Newman:

You can stand alone or with somebody else
Or stand with all of us, together
If you can believe in something bigger than yourself
You can follow the flag forever

They say it's just a dream some dreamers dreamed
That it's an empty thing  that really has no meaning
They say it's all a lie but it's not a lie
I'm going to follow the flag 'til I die

Into every life a little rain must fall but it's not gonna rain forever
You can rise above—you can rise above it all
We will follow the flag together
We will follow the flag forever

Antisemitism

I always enjoy reading Kevin Williamson and usually agree with him. From today's "The Antisemitism Grift," and once again, I like what he writes:

One of the bits of Christian civilization that limps on in our time is the seedbed of antisemitism. It is a supreme irony: The central figure in Christianity is—I do not write was—a Jew, a Jewish man from a Jewish family who lived, until the advent of an extraordinary career, an ordinary Jewish life in a Jewish land. Christianity is not Judaism, and its fundamental claims are incompatible with Jewish orthodoxy. Pope John Paul II taught Christians to think of the Jewish people as “our elder brothers in faith,” and that seems to me the right way to go about it—a serious difference, but a loving disagreement within the family. It is, I think, the endurance of Jews that drives Christians a little bit mad—or a lot mad, at times—as though the Christian failure to entirely assimilate the Jewish people into our religion (its fragments) and into our Weltanschauung were the mark of some sort of a divine rebuke. Like much of what ails Christianity, this trouble stems from a Christian refusal to believe our own dogma and a Christian failure to understand that dogma in the first place. We behave as though God were unable to attend to His Own affairs, including His ongoing business with His chosen people. That is the democratic spirit in religion: the urge to give the Architect of the Universe a little nudge, here and there, and a little advice. (more, possibly behind a paywall)

Kevin D. Williamson, "The Antisemitism Grift," The Dispatch, Nov. 3, 2025.