tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post1513716614686625015..comments2023-10-05T08:25:13.232-04:00Comments on Biblical Evidence for Catholicism: Dialogue About Cardinal Newman's Conduct and Motivation During the Kingsley / "Apologia" Controversy (vs. Paul Priest)Dave Armstronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-37860957449078532672013-03-16T18:47:00.965-04:002013-03-16T18:47:00.965-04:00I appreciate it. Man, that was a serious fall. I h...I appreciate it. Man, that was a serious fall. I hope you are fully recovered soon. I had a sledding accident in December where I bruised my ribs, but nothing broken, as far as I know.<br /><br />God bless!Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-10199241717645685232013-03-16T14:28:35.802-04:002013-03-16T14:28:35.802-04:00The irony is I can't remember writing a word o...The irony is I can't remember writing a word of this - I'd fallen down a flight of stone stairs seriously hurt my head, cracked a few ribs and was doped up on painkillers...I must have engaged in this during the haze...I apologise for the terrier-like belligerent tenacity and arrogance but even now 'compos mentis' [well as much as I'll ever be] I don't disagree with myself - Newman can sort it out himself....On the side of the angelshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05558623489507006790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-20283544433196747292013-01-07T23:45:02.624-05:002013-01-07T23:45:02.624-05:00Hi Jeff,
Fair enough. I appreciate it and accept ...Hi Jeff,<br /><br />Fair enough. I appreciate it and accept your apology.<br /><br />I'll unblock you. You defriended me, so that's up to you, what you want to do with that. If you're unblocked, you are still able to post on my page, because all posts are open to the public.<br /><br />I'll also post your apology on Facebook, which is only fair to you.<br /><br />God bless you too, and all the best.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-88837208603994805782013-01-07T22:00:17.521-05:002013-01-07T22:00:17.521-05:00I owe you an apology for speaking to you harshly a...I owe you an apology for speaking to you harshly and uncharitably on Facebook. I don't think we'd probably enjoy each other much on Facebook for a while--something about our attitudes on this subject is apt to make for rancor. <br /><br />But you are my brother in Christ and that matter more than acres of irritation. I am sorry! God bless.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05362705229107017257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-33734890412345189332012-12-11T04:35:12.598-05:002012-12-11T04:35:12.598-05:00Sarcasm and biting wit, without anger behind it, w...Sarcasm and biting wit, without anger behind it, was also the mode used by a lot of good teachers at good schools for boys in that day. (Bad teachers of course copied this mode with a lot of anger behind it, as referenced by Rowling's Snape. But generally the sarcasm was regarded as a fun and funny way for teachers to teach.)Bansheehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12594214770417497135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-25923736233894508292012-11-30T15:39:14.622-05:002012-11-30T15:39:14.622-05:00It has already been established that elegant and n...It has already been established that elegant and nuanced "politeness" often 'concealed' a rapiered wit. Indeed it was the civilized 'duel', where you demonstrated skill and earned respect. Mr kngsley had, in a vulgar slur, claimed that Newman was not worthy of being treated with respect. Newman took care to school him and the readers that indeed he was. It was very finely crafted. The readers of the magazine would have been chortling at the skill used to demonstrate that Newman required the respect due a skilled opponent. <br />In a society that treasured the skillful word, Newman's response would have earned him top marks. I think Newman would've been chortling and thankful at the opportunity to balance such a public assault. Blogguyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11388914146761356760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-80941992024097163042012-11-29T22:50:53.114-05:002012-11-29T22:50:53.114-05:00(subscribe)(subscribe)The Ubiquitoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08395703772492059721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-81807126324208192592012-11-29T22:40:52.756-05:002012-11-29T22:40:52.756-05:00"A casual reader would think my language deno..."A casual reader would think my language denoted anger – but it did not"<br /><br />This seems to underscore, not detract from, the thrust of his first comment. Fact of the matter is that: <br /><br />1. There exists a hidden kind of language which seems polite but can mean scathing rebuke, i.e. irony. It is particularly pronounced in gentry and the academic. <br />2. Newman uses irony, and was also an academic. <br />3. Newman uses language which is more closely related to words from anger than words from "niceness." <br />4. These facts are clouded by time and a presumption of saintliness. <br /><br />If No. 3 is not true, how does Newman's reply make any sense? For if it is the <i>casual</i> reader which may mistake Newman's words for words from anger, then in the language of his time his words are not so nearly obvious examples from charity as Mr. Vogt suggests. <br /><br />Now, clearly, the commenter goes overboard in actually assuming anger to Cdl. Newman, but this is a far narrower point of contention between the two of you than between him and Mr. Vogt, who does seem clueless of the above four facts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-81114106006621805722012-11-29T20:00:15.951-05:002012-11-29T20:00:15.951-05:00My opponent believes what he does about the first ...My opponent believes what he does about the first letter, and he argues from a completely different perspective than I do.<br /><br />I denied that Newman's first letter in the fracas was written in a state of emotional rage and fury. My opponent is utterly convinced that it was the case.<br /><br />For him it is primarily a psychological examination and painstaking interpretation of words; for me it is mainly a matter of historiography: so I cited letters and biographers: which he roundly dismissed with no consideration.<br /><br />He's still going on and on over at the site, getting more and more insulting as he goes, but I have sworn off now.<br /><br />My profound sympathies to you and anyone who actually made it through this excruciating tedium.<br />Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-78434481114129639132012-11-29T18:05:57.801-05:002012-11-29T18:05:57.801-05:00Good gravy my eyes glazed over. Someone help me, w...Good gravy my eyes glazed over. Someone help me, what is all this investment in Bl. Newman's emotional state in aid of anyway?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com