Rationalists, Doomsayers, & Survivors

Though not generally a big fan of horror movies, I really enjoyed The Mist (2001).  Here's a very brief thematic summary from Wikipedia (Spoiler Alert:  the full entry in Wikipedia outlines the whole movie, including the end):

[. . .] the central theme is what ordinary people will be driven to do under extraordinary circumstances. The plot revolves around members of the small town of Bridgton, Maine who conceal themselves in a local supermarket when a violent thunderstorm cuts off the power. While they struggle to survive an unnatural mist which envelops the town [. . .], extreme tensions arise amongst the survivors.

What's interesting to me about this movie is the way Stephen King (the novella's author) and the script writers of the movie present three distinct hermeneutical lenses through which the people in the supermarket view the crisis they find themselves in and how they come to deal with the horror they have little control over. 

The three lenses are clarified once a small group of those locked in the supermarket try to leave the building through the loading dock.  I won't give away exactly what happens, but this group witnesses an event that confirms for them earlier reports of what the mist conceals.  When they report what they have seen, the people divide into three hermeneutical groups:

Evidence-based rationalists who believe that the men are lying about the event they witnessed, steadfastly insisting on empirical proof and refusing to credit the incredible story w/o such proof.

Apocalyptic doomsayers who believe the men but interpret the event as a sign of God's wrathful judgment on a sinful world, demanding expiation in blood.

Pragmatic survivors who are unsure of what the men saw but nonetheless prepare themselves for survival as if the men are telling the truth.   

Each group proposes its own explanation of the crisis according to its hermeneutical lens and sets out possible responses to the crisis given their initial assumptions.   Each group is sorely tested by events, and each experiences potentially debilitating set backs.

The ending is heartbreaking.  And you will be very surprised to learn which of the three turns out to be true. 

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Coffee Bowl Browsing

American-style sex scandal hits the German Church.  The Church in Europe is under both external and internal attack.  Pay attention to the amount of energy and time the Holy Father puts into calling on European Catholics to return to the faith of our fathers.  He knows what's going on.

BXVI calls out the culture of death in the E.U.  Talk about a lone voice crying out in the wilderness.

Kudos to B.O. on making the right decision:  no plans for the U.S. to join the International Criminal Court anytime soon.

The decline of the global warming farce is not being hidden.  It's time to de-fund the whole thing and send the IPCC apparatchiks back to their dank basements at mama's house.

I watched highlights of Sarah Palin's address to the Tea Party convention.  What I heard wasn't all that impressive.  Some are painting her as a female Ronald Reagan.  Naw.  She's gonna need a MUCH better speechwriter to achieve that.  Governor Palin, have your people call my people.  I'm free this summer!

The other side of the CCHD story:  Fr. Frank Pavone, pro-life priest extraordinaire, defends the former head of the CCHD, James Carr, against accusations of being pro-abortion. 

Tom Peters, the American Papist, has a round-up of links about the CCHD controversy.

This is both cute and cruel.  But the really important question here is:  where's the sweet and spicy relish?

10 places you cannot visit. . .including the chapel containing the Ark of the Covenant!

Man survives polar beat attack:  gruesome pics that may make you lose your breakfast.

13 foreign words with no English equivalents.  During my time in China as an English professor, I had a very difficult time learning the rules of guanxi ("gwan-chee").

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Modernist crisis in religious life?

Cardinal Franc Rode, prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, recently addressed the problems in contemporary religious orders, describing the situation as a "modern crisis." 

He argues that declining numbers, systemic dissent and disobedience, and spiritual malaise are all rooted in a surrender to secular worldviews, specifically, "the adoption of a secularist mentality and the abandonment of traditional practices."

The situation in contemporary religious life is not only a modern crisis but a "modernist crisis" as well; that is, a crisis brought on by the introduction, cultivation, and harvesting of the destructive fruits of modernist thinking.  

As a philosophical and theological worldview, modernism leads to several ways of thinking and acting that erode spiritually fruitful religious life. . .

First, modernism elevates scientific rationalism above mystery.  In an attempt to replace less reliable sources of knowing such as revelation, myth, mystery, etc., modernist thinkers placed materialist reason and science on the throne of knowledge.  Reason's patrimony as a divine gift for understanding God through His creation was up-ended.  Reason became an end in itself. 

Second, modernism, now committed to the pursuit of knowledge through reason alone, abandoned traditional metaphysics, the science of being.  No longer concerned with existence itself as a foundation for knowing, modernism replaced the divine with the natural, leaving us blind to everything but the material world.  Once our ways of knowing were naturalized, we no longer needed to appeal to any sort of objective ethical/moral standards.  There is nothing beyond nature that gives us a way of deciding between right and wrong, so there is no real  metaphysical difference btw right and wrong.

Third, if there is no real metaphysical difference btw right and wrong, how do we go about deciding which behaviors, beliefs, etc. are acceptable and which are not?  Since we are dealing only with the natural world--no objective standards, no appeal to God--we must appeal to emotion, affection.  Now, our moral decisions are made after asking the question, "how does this make me feel?"  Trusting in feelings over and above a rational assessment of objective truth inevitability leads to moral chaos. 

Fourth, by focusing exclusively on individual feelings, modernism rapidly declined into a project for self-fulfillment and narcissist projection:  the world and everyone in it is all about me and my needs.  As the sole creator and redeemer of my world, I am the final arbiter of what's good for me, bad for me, necessary for me to thrive, and you are just a player in my world--though a player I choose to respect as if you were totally independent of my decisions.   My respect for you, however, is premised solely on your willingness to stay out of my way.  Detached from community and transcendence, I am a morally free agent but, perversely, one largely determined by genetics, social forces, and biology. 

Fifth, as modernist rationalism slowly became more and more the possession of materialist science, the humanities surrendered to nihilism.  No objective standards.  Total suspicion of authority.  Elevation of liberationist politics over the search for truth.  Anti-realist appeals to language as the sole builder of "reality."  Collectivists models for knowing (philosopher Richard Rorty once noted, "The truth is what my colleagues will allow me to get away with saying.")  And the most destructive development of all for religious life:  the death of charity in the pursuit of individualized careers, agendas, etc. even to the destruction of the community.

Though Crdl Rode is correct in noting that secularization is destroying religious life, I do not think that an uncritical return to traditional religious practices will reverse this trend.  What we need is a renaissance in the humanist pursuit of mystery in the art, liturgy, theology, philosophy, literature of the Catholic sacramental imagination.  Simply picking up a rosary or wearing a habit is not going to revive religious life.  We have to come to a broadly, deeply held understanding of what it means to "stand under" the mystery of the divine and live toward our perfection in Him.  Traditional religious practices are more likely to lead us to this goal than the fabricated neo-pagan rituals many religious communities use now.  However, there is no magic in devotionals; no magic in habits or monstrances or anything else we associate with traditional religion. 

What we must do at every level is re-establish the notion that intellect, will, reason, emotion, etc. are all divine gifts oriented toward our divinization though Christ.  Nothing can stand above faith as the source and summit of our life in Christ, but every gift we have received as well-loved creatures can stand along side faith in order to clarify, enlighten, and distinguish.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Coffee Bowl Browsing

B.O.'s adviser for faith-based initiatives continues his anti-Catholic bigotry.  This guy needs to go.

Will we witness another bloody revolution in Iran?

There is Hope for Change in Nevada.  It's coming Nov. 2, 2010.

Your Majesty, the peasants are revolting!

A little wake up music for you farm boys and girls out there.

I have no idea what this pic means or why it was taken. . .if you laugh at it, you're strange.  LOL.

Beware of Dog. . .he thinks he's Rambo.

The inexplicable.  Ummmm. . .I dunno. . .you tell me.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Catholic identity at the University of Dallas

John Allen reports on his participation in a recent panel discussion at the University of Dallas.

The discussion topic:  "The Identity of a Catholic University."  

Oddly, Mr. Allen contrasts "intellectual openness" with "religious orthodoxy," as if one cannot be both open and orthodox.  Of course, what "openness" means to the Tolerant Crowd is a dogmatic adherence to leftist ideology, deviations from which result in swift prosecution and punishment at most secular universities. 

So, yes, it's true. . .one cannot be intellectually open and secularly orthodox.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Just Say No to the Ouija

Now there's a pink Ouija board. . .just in case you want to introduce your daughters and granddaughters to the practice of occult divination.

And just in case you DO want to introduce them to such things:  DON'T!  Marketed as a parlor game, the Ouija board is anything but a game.  It's a doorway to Something that no sane person wants to play with.

Even if you reject the notion that divination is a way of invoking demonic forces (whatever they may be), and even if you reject the notion that there is any such thing as demonic forces, divination of any kind taps into the human unconscious and brings to the surface images, patterns, forces, ideas, passions, etc. that are unconscious for very good reasons.  

Chief among these reasons is the tendency of the human mind to shape its understanding of the world around the complexities of daily experience.  Guided by right reason, the mind is capable of rational deliberation, of weighing options and calculating consequences for self-preservation within the proper bounds of Right and Wrong.  Once we have opened ourselves to our more primitive impulses and passions, reason quickly begins to look more and more like a nagging restraint rather than a guide.  And what is left to guide us then?  Predator instinct? Power?

From a Christian perspective, occult divination is the outright rejection of Divine Providence.  We don't need to know the future (if such a thing is possible) b/c we trust in God's promise to provide and care for us.  All we need do is give God thanks for all the blessings He has already given us and do what is Right.  

If you own a Ouija board, Tarot cards, etc. get rid of them.  Destroy them.  There's no need to be superstitious about the process--just burn them along with other trash, or tear them up so no one else can use them. 

Follow HancAquam ------------>

India spanks IPCC

The evangelism arm of the Church of Global Warming, the IPCC, is starting to unravel at lightening speed. 

The Indian government has announced that it has pulled out of the U.N.'s effort to fabricate a global climate crisis and formed its own scientific foundation to track changes in the Himalayas. 

Can China be far behind? 

Pope Al Gore I was unavailable for comment.   The Nobel Peace Prize committee is too embarrassed to show its face in public.

Of note:  GreenPeace U.K. calls on the IPCC Chief Pachauri to resign.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Powerhouses of Prayer: O.P. Nuns

Another excerpt from the Holy Father's Wednesday general audience on St Dominic:

+  +  +

When Dominic died in 1221 in Bologna, the city that declared him its patron, his work had already had great success. The Order of Preachers, with the support of the Holy See, had spread to many countries of Europe to the benefit of the whole Church. Dominic was canonized in 1234, and it is he himself, with his sanctity, who indicates to us two indispensable means for apostolic action to be incisive. First of all, Marian devotion, which he cultivated with tenderness and which he left as precious legacy to his spiritual children, who in the history of the Church have had the great merit of spreading the prayer of the holy rosary, so dear to the Christian people and so rich in evangelical values, a true school of faith and piety. In the second place, Dominic, who took care of some women's convents in France and in Rome, believed profoundly in the value of intercessory prayer for the success of apostolic work. Only in Paradise will we understand how much the prayer of the cloistered effectively supports apostolic action! To each one of them I direct my grateful and affectionate thoughts.

+  +  +

I can personally attest to the fruits of our cloistered sisters' ministry of contemplative prayer.  Their intercessions have helped me, my family and friends, and the friars of my province dozens of times in the ten years I have been a Dominican.  For the Order as a whole, our nuns are a Powerhouse of Prayer! 

If you would like to learn more about our cloistered sisters, check out this link.  

Complete text of the Wednesday audience.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Why is this Canadian premier coming to the US for surgery?

The Premier of Canada's Newfoundland province will travel to the U.S. for heart surgery.

This choice by Premier Danny Williams should raise serious questions in the minds of Americans who look to Canada as a model for socialized medicine in the U.S.  What's wrong with Canada's system of health care that scares the premier?

Not only does the premier's choice indicate a serious lack of confidence in the Canadian system, but it also points out the tendency of the rich and powerful to abandon the nationalized schemes of wealth redistribution they support when their own health and wealth is threatened. 

Of note here is the consistent refusal of Congressional Democrats to require Senators and Congressmen to use the public option they were trying to force on Americans.  Majorities in both houses of Congress voted against several GOP amendments requiring Congress to abandon its "Cadillac" health plan in favor of the much touted public-option.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Recognize dissent for it is: corrosive

In his address to the bishops of England & Wales, the Holy Father challenged the prelates to "recognise dissent for what it is." 

Too often disguised as "dialogue," dissent endangers ecclesial unity and leads the faithful into serious error.  Lest anyone come away with the idea that calling out dissenters amounts to suppressing free speech or academic freedom, we must remember that the Holy Father himself is one of the best examples of how the Church can talk to a secular culture in a reasoned manner with fruitful results.  The orthodoxy of the Church is not a straitjacket nor it is a choir for parroting papal talking points.  As I have noted many times, a Church that boasts prominent theologians as diverse as Augustine, Bonaventure, Aquinas, de Lubac, van Balthasar, and Congar cannot be labeled an oppressive monolith of fossilized thought.  

There is a distinction to be made between the Truth of the Faith and how this Truth is understood and communicated.  Gregory of Nyssa in the 3rd century believed and taught the truth of the Holy Trinity.  Thomas Aquinas, a thousand years later, also believed and taught the truth of the Holy Trinity.  However, their approach in communicating this mystery couldn't be more different.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

BXVI on St Dominic

At yesterday's general audience, BXVI spoke about Saint Dominic Guzmán, the founder of the Order of Preachers:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Today I wish to speak of the great contribution made by Saint Dominic to the renewal of the Church in the Middle Ages. As a priest of the Spanish diocese of Osma, he was sent on missions throughout Europe, which drew his attention to the need for sound and zealous preachers to bring the Gospel to the people. He was entrusted with the task of refuting the heresy of the Albigensians, who denied the incarnation of Christ, the resurrection of the body and the value of marriage and the sacraments. Embracing a life of poverty, Dominic dedicated himself to the task of preaching the Gospel, and with a band of followers he established the Order of Preachers, also known as Dominican Friars. Adapting the rule of Saint Augustine to the needs of the apostolic life, Dominic placed emphasis on theological study, prayer and community life for his friars. Thus fortified, they would be sent out on missions as itinerant, mendicant preachers. Hence the Dominican motto, contemplata aliis tradere – to hand on to others the fruits of contemplation. One important way in which the Dominicans did this was by promoting the prayer of the rosary, a beautiful means of contemplating, through the eyes of Mary, the truth revealed in the mysteries of the life, death and Resurrection of her son. 

Some interesting facts about the OP's. . .

The Holy Father's household theologian is always a Dominican (there were a few Franciscans thrown in there Way Back When).  The current household theologian is from Poland, fra.Wojciech Giertych, O.P.  Fr. Giertych is also a professor of moral theology here at the Angelicum.

The Holy Father's distinctive white cassock is an adapted Dominican habit.  Pope Pius V, an O.P., wore his habit while pope and his successors adapted it for daily use.  It is traditional for O.P. friars to wear the full habit--including black cape and hood--while out in the city of Rome as a sign of respect for the Holy Father's distinctive garb.  Papal protocol does not allow those in private audience with the Pope to wear white.  Only heads of state are exempted.

The leaders of the friars--from the Master right on down to the priory's lector--are elected for limited terms.  There are no "until death" offices in the Order.  There is evidence that Thomas Jefferson was familiar with the Order's constitution and used some of its principles in drafting our nation's founding documents. 

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Coffee Bowl Browsing

Thomas Sowell discusses the role of intellectuals in American society.  As the last year has conclusively demonstrated being intellectually gifted doesn't necessarily indicate a gift for leadership.

If you like a good mystery and ancient Roman history fascinates you, you really can't do better than the novels of Steven Saylor. 

The murder of peer-review in the ClimateGate scandals. . .an autopsy.

Promising to keep lobbyists out of the White House:  grammatical nuance.  The surest way to become an object of suspicion is to rely on word games to defend outright lies.

Tea Partiers battling it out over a winnable political platform.  Gotta love American politics!

The Dept of Defense is rewriting the rules for Congressional use of military aircraft for personal travel.  We can dub these new rules:  "No to Nancy and Her Kids Rules."

B.O.'s DoubleTalk/DoubleThink:  Orwellian rhetoric done by a Master. 

Stuart Schwartz on K. Olbermann:  And so the venom drips, and the ratings sink. Olbermann is cruel to all who, as a class, have rejected him, such as joyful people and women...or people of faith and women...or people with traditional marriages and women...and those with well-adjusted relationships and women. Did I mention women?  OUCH!  Remind me not to get on Mr. Schwartz's bad side.

Dems support campaign finance reform b/c their corporate contributions skyrocketed after McCain-Feingold was enacted.   

The GOP is made up of Stalinists, right-wing fascists, Khmer Rouge communists, Talibanists, southern segregationists, and Nazis.  Wow.  And here I thought the GOP had such a small tent.  

The U.K.'s House of Lords stalls a government bill that would force the Church to ordain women and people in SSM's.  The bill isn't dead.  Let's call this one:  "Liberal Fascist Zombies Attack the Church."  

First I learn that the GOP is run by Talibanists and Communists and now I learn that it's not gypsies who are stealing babies but BAPTISTS!  My world is coming apart. . . 

The USCCB's point man for the Campaign for Human Development served on the board of a pro-abortion, pro-SSM political group.  Ah, now I understand how so much Catholic money got funneled to groups like ACORN.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Love hurts

4th Sunday OT: Readings

Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP

SS. Domenico e Sisto, Roma

Jesus, once again, riles people up! He's good at that. Like prophets before him, he tells people what they don't want to hear. By proclaiming that Isaiah's prophecy of the coming of the Messiah has been fulfilled in their hearing, Jesus challenges those gathered in the temple to step up and believe that he embodies God's promise of salvation. Instead, assuming that the authority of a majority is sufficient to determine truth, the crowd runs him out of town and tries to lynch him. He walks unharmed through the riot and leaves town. Why do the temple-goers reject Jesus' claim to be the fulfillment of God's promise to send a Messiah? Two reasons: 1) Jesus is a local boy, and we all know that “no prophet is accepted in his native place;” and 2) Jesus' use of proverb, “Physician, cure yourself,” indicates his refusal to perform a showy miracle to confirm his identity. What does he do instead? He does exactly what pastors and preachers are taught in seminary not to do when parishioners get twitchy. He throws down a challenge and a rebuke. In essence, he says, “God's own people have always rejected His prophets, and look at the results. He graces Gentiles before Jews and you people never learn.” Ouch. If Jesus had had a bishop, His Excellency's phone would be ringing off the hook! Remember how often we are told that Jesus is a uniter not a divider, a peace-bringer not a controversialist. He's all about harmony and consensus and living within the tensions of difference. Well, tell that to the screaming lynch mob. They might disagree. Obviously, Jesus lacked the cultured pastoral touch of a postmodern bishop. So, should we look to him and his prophetic style as a model for preaching his gospel?

Confrontation has its place in preaching. The prophets of the Old Testament were known and feared for their unwavering commitment to speaking God's message even in the face of torture and execution. Kings dodged them when possible, summoning them to court to answer for their traitorous speech only when necessary. Prophets were notoriously stubborn, self-righteous, and usually disreputably attired. Any one of these three characteristics was enough to warrant royal and public dismissal. Add to the scene the fact that prophets tended to be well-known local boys and you have the makings of a courtly farce. Is it any wonder then that the prophets of old resorted to confrontation when dealing with the cold-hearts and closed-minds of a nation's rulers? Sometimes you have to smash through a wall when the door is barred. Sometimes the shock of hearing the truth spoken aloud is enough to cure the deafness of the worst sinner. And sometimes it isn't. On these occasions, it's wise to get as far away from the condemned nation as possible. Why? Because quite possibly the scariest thing a prophet can say is: “Behold, you will suffer the consequences of your hard heart!” It's time to run.

Unfortunately, these days, it seems that every corner, every cable channel, every church/mosque/temple has its own prophet proclaiming the coming apocalypse. Like a flock of squawking crows, these folks fly around the world squeaking and squealing warning us of imminent local destruction and the inevitability of global disaster if we don't change our ways. They have adopted the confrontational rhetoric of the wildest biblical prophet. Do we listen? Some certainly do. Most don't. Confrontation oft repeated quickly devolves into annoying harassment. Those ominous crows start to look and sound like Chicken Little's. What's missing from their squealy prophesying is Godly love, a sincere concern for the good of the whole beyond the immediate personal benefits of power and prestige. What's missing is the divine authority that Jesus himself uses in the temple to announce his arrival as the Messiah. His authority is the power and glory of the most excellent way, the way of sacrificial love.

This leads us to the big question of the day: can sacrificial love be confrontational? Anyone who has ever marched in a pro-life demonstration or prayed outside an abortion clinic will tell you that the counter-protesters and the escorts are demonically vicious. For them this isn't just about freedom of choice and left/right politics. They hate us. Passionately hate us. You can expect that groups on opposite ends of the political spectrum to get feisty, maybe even a little rowdy, in the midst of a march. But the bile and venom spewed by pro-abortion activists at pro-life folks goes well beyond the kind of anger that normal politics generates. Why? The choice to have an abortion is intensely personal; it goes to the very core what most Americans think of us their untouchable autonomy in deciding what's best for them. An unwanted pregnancy attaches unwanted responsibilities and necessarily limits a woman's choice of options. But even more than this, pregnancy places a woman in the natural mode of motherhood and all that that implies. At the very core of motherhood is sacrificial love, giving oneself wholly to another. When pro-life marchers remind abortion advocates that the fetus is a person, a being deserving of love, those who would call the killing of this person a moral good react with unadulterated rage. They know the Church is right. And they must cultivate a self-righteous wrath in order to drown out their guilt. The gospel message of love used by the pro-life movement to stubbornly resist compromising with the culture of death shames them into hatred. Denied a convenient salve for their seared consciences, the venom flows and they fall more securely into demonic hands.

It should be shockingly clear to the Church by now that our best witness to the culture of death is sacrificial love. Paul writes, “Love is patient, love is kind. . .it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” With some we can reason. With others we can demonstrate. But some we must simply love. Bearing up under the burden of hatred, believing solely in the power of mercy, hoping in the promises of the Father, and enduring insult, persecution, and trial, the Church must not be satisfied with merely presenting the truth of the gospel, flashing cue cards and murmuring sound bites. What will heal a seared conscience cannot be logically deduced and crammed onto a bumper sticker. Slogans on placards are easily refuted by other slogans on placards. What cannot be refuted is an act of love done in sacrifice, a willing act of surrender done so that another might be see the truth. Paul reminds us what we know by faith, “Love never fails.” Even as the prophet feels the sword cut into his flesh, he knows that he has succeeded in touching a conscience burned by hatred and malice. His persistence in telling the truth is not ended by death but rather vindicated by it, shown to be the undeniably divine power it truly is.

When he proclaims to the people in the temple that Isaiah's messanic prophecy has been fulfilled in their hearing and subsequently chastises the crowd for their unbelief, Jesus causes a riot. He holds up before the people their dishonesty, their faithlessness, their charred consciences. He shows them that they know he is telling the truth and yet still refuse to hear it spoken. For them to believe such a proclamation changes everything-- uproots centuries of tradition and belief, revolutionizes everyday life, forces them to make a choice and live by it. Rather than surrender, they riot and pour out the hatred and malice of those who have seen the corrupted state of their souls. How does Jesus respond? He dies on the cross for them. If we will be his Church, we must be prepared to do nothing less. The march for life is a march to the cross. . .not for ourselves but for those who will not see, will not hear.

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Notes on the Book Depository Wish List Experiment

Two generous HancAquam readers have used the BDWL to sent me two books.  

First, books do not disappear from the Wish List once purchased as they do on the Amazon Wish List.  I only discovered this today when a book arrived as a very pleasant surprise.  So, please, let me know if you buy a book so I can delete it from the list.

Second, also unlike the Amazon list, the BD list does not automatically include my shipping address when you add a book to the shopping cart.  I tried to include it in the notes that accompany each listing, but these notes only appear when I sign into the account.  My shipping address is at the bottom of this site on the right. 

I've contact BD about both of these issues, but they have not been able to help me out. . .yet.

Thanks again!

Follow HancAquam ------------>

Virtue & Vice: what's yours?

Virtues are good habits.  Vices are bad habits.

Virtues help us to become the best version of ourselves that we can be.  Vices prevent us from doing so.

What do you consider to be your single best virtue and your worst vice?

Remember:  keep it clean!

My Best Virtue:  I am an unrepentant idealist when it comes to doing the right thing.

My Worst Vice:  I am stubborn beyond reason.

Yes, the two are directly related.


Follow HancAquam ------------>