Sometimes the courage of one true-hearted man makes all the difference.đź§µ
Every time I read the tale of St George’s showdown with the dragon, my attention is caught by a different detail. One that struck me recently was in the backstory, before George even showed up.
When the dragon’s terrors began, the men of Silene gathered to put a stop to it.
But they all fled in terror the moment the dragon appeared.
This detail not only establishes a contrast between these inferior men and St George, but it also helps to establish the impossibly high cost that a failure of courage can impose.
The dragon now faced no opposition as it "envenomed" the city at will with its horrible breath. (Another important detail.) To appease it, the townspeople gave two sheep per day. But soon that wasn’t enough and they took to offering humans.
It gets worse. Human sacrifices also proved inadequate. The dragon had a more choice appetite. It wanted to eat children. Also very telling. Evil wants the children.
So the people of Silene held lotteries to determine which unfortunate children would be next.
Lesson: the failure of men to muster the necessary courage leads to the sacrifice of their children.
But then, just as the king's daughter was offered up, St George happened upon the scene. He crossed himself, charged the dragon, and killed it. Alone he accomplished what a small army of men could not. Like I said, the courage of one real man sometimes makes all the difference.
St George's courage and martial prowess gave others a chance at life. For this reason he became the patron saint of chivalry.
It appears more and more like the dragons are coming out again and a similar test will be put to us.
St George, ora pro nobis.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
100% correct: no one really cares about feeling welcome. They want to be convinced that this place is worth belonging to. It's hard to convince them when the Church chucks everything that makes it special and attractive in order to appear more "welcoming." https://t.co/0HwFdeCjc5twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Welcoming soon came to look a lot like pandering. Most all standards seemed to give way and everything was made easier.
Despite what people say, everyone in their heart of hearts hates panderers. We want to be challenged, not catered to. twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Best example: fasting.
Authorities seemed to determine that it was "asking too much" to maintain a robust practice of required fasting within the Church, so they relaxed it to the point of non-existence. Two times per year. And even then, what they mean by fast is very soft.
Yesterday was the 7th anniversary of my father's death.
I thought I'd honor him by sharing a few thoughts on a virtue of his: he was the best storyteller I've ever heard.
His favorite subject was a friend named Rob. From a distance, Rob seemed an unexceptional fellow—dark hair, glasses, medium height, medium build. He worked as an engineer, had two children, and lived in the suburbs.
But up close you could see a wild gleam in his eye and a hard chin. Rob's defining feature was his love for fighting, and his aptitude for it.
One of the Enemy’s top strategies for thwarting human lives is to maim and confuse our vocabularies—particularly the language of the virtues, the language of human excellence.
The more I study such things, the more I suspect a Screwtapean operation… 🧵
This problem of maimed words is not just a problem for scholars—this is our problem. It has left us very confused about what it is we are supposed to aim at.
Worse, it even makes the old moral targets seem lame. Virtue becomes the province of fussy schoolmarms and moralizers.
I’ve written previously about how he has vandalized the virtue of meekness.
Who would want to be meek when we operate under the contemporary understanding of the word?
During St Fernando III’s sixteen-month Siege of Seville in 1247, which effectively finished the Reconquista, three Christian knights were constantly debating which of them was the best. 🧵
They decided upon a contest: they would ride up to the gates of the city and bang it with the butt of their spear. Whoever had the courage to go through with it would win.
Early one morning they rode out. The Moors seem to have thought these Christians were ambassadors from Fernando, come to negotiate.
All three knights made it to the gates and smote them. So the dispute was unresolved and they rode back.
The Sound of Freedom—
I just got back from seeing it, and so I thought I’d collect some disjointed thoughts in something like a review thread.🧵
Long story short: It is a powerful film, worth seeing. As many have said, we have a special duty to patronize movies that are made for us. Otherwise we have no right to complain about the drooping propaganda coming out of Hollywood ever again.
Here's hoping the studios will take particular interest in the ticket sales for a film like The Sound of Freedom.
At least the people at The Guardian are taking note. This headline should tell you everything you need to know.
If you've followed this account for long, you know I love few things more than a king who fights at the front of his men—Alexander, Richard, Louis IX, and so on.
King Fernando III of Castile and Leon (1199-1252) took it one step further. đź§µ https://t.co/4s2IZBnc0I
During the Siege of Seville in 1247, Fernando brought a force of 3000 against a city of 300,000. Such a small band of Reconquistadors meant that every moment was an all-hands-on-deck effort for the Christians. This included night watch.
Which the king himself took part in!
The warrior-saint was famous for never allowing his knights to suffer greater danger than he himself did in battle. But there's a certain chivalric glamor in leading your troops from the front, and any magnanimous man would live for that opportunity.