Pride

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 151 of 174 · 20 per page

• From The Sexual Life of Catherine M. (2001)

  I have already let it be understood that I was reticent in social relationships and I saw the sexual act as a refuge into which I willingly abandoned myself as a way of avoiding looks that embarrassed me and conversations for which I was ill prepared. There was, therefore, no question of my taking any initiative. I never flirted or tried to pull. On the other hand, I was completely available: at all times and in all places, without hesitation or regret, by every one of my bodily orifices and with a totally clear conscience. If, as Proust’s theory goes, I see my own personality in terms of the image that other people have made of it, then that is the dominant trait. ‘You never said no, never refused anything. You didn’t make a fuss.’ ‘You were far from inert, but you weren’t demonstrative either.’ ‘You did things so naturally, you were neither reticent nor dirty, just a tad masochistic from time to time …’ ‘At an orgy, you were always the first, right out there…’ ‘I remember Robert would send a taxi for you as if there was some emergency, and you would go.’ ‘People thought of you as some sort of phenomenon; even with an incredible number of guys you would still be the same, right up to the end, at their mercy. You didn’t act the little woman who wants to please her man, or as the ball-breaking bitch. You were a mate who happened to be a girl, a girl-friend.’ And also this note that a friend put in his diary and which still gives me a glow of pride to quote it here: ‘Catherine who deserves the highest praise for her calmness and availability in every situation.’

• From The History of Sexuality, Vol. 2: The Use of Pleasure (1984)

  The mileu in which this analysis is placed is socially and politically quite distinct. It is the small society of landholders who must maintain and increase the family wealth and bequeath it to those who bear their name. Xenophon explicitly contrasts this world with that of craftsmen, whose life is not beneficial either to their own health (because of their way of living), or to their friends, or to the city (seeing that they do not have the leisure to attend to its affairs).1 The activity of landowners, on the other hand, is practiced in the marketplace, in the agora, where they can fulfill their duties as friends and as citizens, as well as in the oikos. But the oikos comprises more than just the house proper; it also includes the fields and possessions, wherever they may be located (even outside the boundaries of the city): “whatever someone possesses is part of his household”; it defines a whole sphere of activities.2 And this activity is connected to a lifestyle and an ethical order. The landowner’s existence, if he takes proper care of his estate, is good for him first of all; in any case it is an endurance exercise, physical training that is good for the body, for its health and vigor; it also encourages piety by making it possible to offer rich sacrifices to the gods; it favors friendship relations by providing the occasion to show generosity, to satisfy fully one’s hospitality obligations, and to manifest one’s beneficence toward other citizens. Further, this activity is useful to the entire city in that it adds to its wealth and especially because it supplies it with good defenders: the landowner, being used to strenuous work, is a strong soldier and the wealth he possesses motivates him to courageously defend the homeland.3

• From The Triumph of Christianity (2018)

  Are they servants of Christ? I am a better one . . . with more numerous labors, more numerous imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death. Five times from the Jews I received the forty lashes minus one; three times I was beaten by rods, once I was stoned, three times I have been shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, in danger from robbers, in danger from those of my own race, in danger from gentiles, in danger in the city, in danger in the wilderness, in danger at sea, in danger from those falsely claiming to be brothers, in labor and toil, in many sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in the cold and naked... . (2 Corinthians 11:23-27). We have, then, an exalted emperor and a beleaguered, impoverished craftsman. These are the two most significant converts of Christian history. Without the latter, this history would never have been written. THE SOURCES FOR PAUL’S LIFE AND WORDS Unlike for virtually anyone of equal insignificance at the time, for Paul we have rather good sources for his Christian life, including his conversion and_ his subsequent missionary efforts to convert others. These sources have come down to us in the New Testament. Later believers may have ascribed scriptural status to these books, but historians cannot discount them on these grounds. They are documents produced by people who, at the time, had no idea they were writing the Bible. A number of these are writings in Paul’s own name. Altogether we have thirteen letters, actual pieces of correspondence, allegedly written by Paul, along with several writings from outside the New Testament. Those that did not make it into the Christian canon are without question inauthentic, penned by later Christians claiming to be Paul in order to induce readers to heed their words. Modern readers would call such works forgeries; ancient readers called them equally denigrating things, if and when they realized they were being duped. Since the nineteenth century, scholars have recognized that even some of the letters in the New Testament fit this description. Six of the thirteen canonical Pauline epistles appear to be later productions by authors falsely taking Paul’s name. Even so, that leaves us with seven letters almost certainly from Paul’s own hand, invaluable sources for Paul’s biography.?

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  There was also a special chair of Hebrew which was assigned to Chevalier, a pupil of Vatable and formerly tutor of Queen Elizabeth. Teachers and pupils had to sign the Apostles’ Creed and a confession of faith, which, however, wisely omitted the favorite dogma of predestination, and was abolished in 1576 in order to admit, Papists and Lutherans." Religious exercises opened and closed the daily instructions. The success of the school was extraordinary. No less than nine hundred young men from almost all the nations of Europe were matriculated in the first year as regular scholars, and almost as many, mostly refugees from France and England, prepared themselves by the theological lectures of Calvin for the work of evangelists and teachers in their native land. Among these was John Knox, the great Reformer of Scotland. The Academy continued to flourish with some interruptions. It attracted students from all parts of Protestant Europe, and numbered among its teachers such men as Casaubon, Spangenheim, Hotoman, Francis and Alphonse Turretin, Leclerc, Pictet de Saussure, and Charles Bonnet It was the chief nursery of Protestant ministers and teachers for France, and the principle school of reformed theology and literary culture for more than two hundred years. A degree from that Academy was equivalent in Holland to a degree of any University. Arminius was sent there by the city of Amsterdam to be educated under Beza (1582), who gave him a good testimonial, not knowing that he would become the leader of a mighty reaction against Calvinism. In 1859 the third centennial of the Academy was celebrated in Geneva. The evangelistic work of that Academy was resumed and is successfully carried on in the spirit of Calvin by the Evangelical Society and the Free Theological Seminary of Geneva, which numbered among its first teachers Merle D’Aubigné, the distinguished historian of the Reformation. § 162. Calvin’s Influence upon the Reformed Churches of the Continent. Calvin’s moral power extended over all the Reformed Churches, and over several nationalities—Swiss, French, German, Polish, Bohemian, Hungarian, Dutch, English, Scotch, and American. His religious influence upon the Anglo-Saxon race in both continents is greater than that of any native Englishman, and continues to this day.1228 Calvin and France. Calvin never entered French soil after his settlement in Geneva, and was not even a citizen of the Republic till 1559; but his heart was still in France. From the time he wrote that eloquent letter to Francis the First, in dedicating to him his Institutes, he followed the Protestant movement with the liveliest interest. He was the head of the French Reformation and consulted at every step. He was called as pastor to the first Protestant church in Paris, but declined. He gave to the Huguenots their creed and form of government.

• From White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America (2016)

  to.” His Kentucky home made him white trash, and his chosen residence in Illinois made him a prairie mudsill. Confederates had an easy time equating midwesterners with dirt farmers; to one Virginia artilleryman, they were all “scoundrels, this scum, spawned in prairie mud.” 42 The mudslinging battle, however, ended up working in favor of the Federal side. Republicans and Union officers wore the mudsill label as a badge of pride, and made it a rallying cry for northern democracy. This strategy began even before Lincoln was elected. At a large rally in New York City, Iowa’s lieutenant governor gave an impassioned speech in which he praised the “rail splitter” as the best farmer for the job—a man willing to protect the “mudsill and mechanic.” And he joked that every Republican in his state had “made up their minds to cultivate mudsill ideas.” 43 The New York publication Vanity Fair used satire to turn the tables on Confederate class taunts. Their writers not only deflated the southerner’s gallant self-image, but also had a field day defending his “groveling” foe with “lobby ears”—the mudsill. (“Lob” was another word for a rustic knave.) Imitating southern speechifiers and hack journalists, the magazine described Lincoln as the chief magistrate of the “Greasy Mechanics and Mudsills of the barbarian North.” In Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper (1863), Lincoln, as caricatured, is literally a mudsill—stuck in the mud and unable to reach Jefferson Davis in Richmond. Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper, February 21, 1863 Jefferson Davis’s stilted oratory was equally subject to Vanity Fair ’s withering satire. In a mock proclamation given after the First Battle of Bull Run, Davis issues an edict saying that his army would leave Washington in the dust, hang the “besotted idiot” Lincoln from the nearest tree, and topple New York City, turning the Seventh Regiment into body servants for Confederate officers. In his grandiose vision of easy victory, this parody of Davis declared that “mudsill soldiers” would offer little resistance, for “they will fly before us like sheep.” Southerners’ hyperbolic pronouncements were turned on their head; though begun as an insult aimed at plebian northerners, the mudsill designation

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  Zwingli very properly declined the chaplaincy and the increase of salary, and declared frankly that he would never sacrifice a syllable of the truth for love of money; but he continued to receive the former pension of fifty guilders, which was urged upon him without condition, for the purchase of books. In 1520 he declined it altogether,—what he ought to have done long before.38 Francis Zink, the papal chaplain at Einsiedeln, who paid the pension, was present at Zwingli’s interview with Pucci, and says, in a letter to the magistracy at Zurich (1521), that Zwingli could not well have lived without the pension, but felt very badly about it, and thought of returning to Einsiedeln.39 Even as late as Jan. 23, 1523, Pope Adrian VI., unacquainted with the true state of things, wrote to Zwingli a kind and respectful letter, hoping to secure through him the influence of Zurich for the holy see.40 § 9. Zwingli and Luther. Comp. Vol. VI. 620–651, and the portrait of Luther, p. 107. The training of Zwingli for his life-work differs considerably from that of Luther. This difference affected their future work, and accounts in part for their collision when they met as antagonists in writing, and on one occasion (at Marburg) face to face, in a debate on the real presence. Comparisons are odious when partisan or sectarian feeling is involved, but necessary and useful if impartial. Both Reformers were of humble origin, but with this difference: Luther descended from the peasantry, and had a hard and rough schooling, which left its impress upon his style of polemics, and enhanced his power over the common people; while Zwingli was the son of a magistrate, the nephew of a dean and an abbot, and educated under the influence of the humanists, who favored urbanity of manners. Both were brought up by pious parents and teachers in the Catholic faith; but Luther was far more deeply rooted in it than Zwingli, and adhered to some of its doctrines, especially on the sacraments, with great tenacity to the end. He also retained a goodly portion of Romish exclusivism and intolerance. He refused to acknowledge Zwingli as a brother, and abhorred his view of the salvation of unbaptized children and pious heathen. Zwingli was trained in the school of Erasmus, and passed from the heathen classics directly to the New Testament. He represents more than any other Reformer, except Melanchthon, the spirit of the Renaissance in harmony with the Reformation.41 He was a forerunner of modern liberal theology. Luther struggled through the mystic school of Tauler and Staupitz, and the severe moral discipline of monasticism, till he found peace and comfort in the doctrine of justification by faith. Both loved poetry and music next to theology, but Luther made better use of them for public worship, and composed hymns and tunes which are sung to this day. Both were men of providence, and became, innocently, reformers of the Church by the irresistible logic of events.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  By the wide-spread errors described in the preceding chapter, the church was challenged to a mighty intellectual combat, from which she came forth victorious, according to the promise of her Lord, that the Holy Spirit should guide her into the whole truth. To the subjective, baseless, and ever-changing speculations, dreams, and fictions of the heretics, she opposed the substantial, solid realities of the divine revelation. Christian theology grew, indeed, as by inward necessity, from the demand of faith for knowledge. But heresy, Gnosticism in particular, gave it a powerful impulse from without, and came as a fertilizing thunder-storm upon the field. The church possessed the truth from the beginning, in the experience of faith, and in the Holy Scriptures, which she handed down with scrupulous fidelity from generation to generation. But now came the task of developing the substance of the Christian truth in theoretical form 934fortifying it on all sides, and presenting it in clear light before the understanding. Thus the Christian polemic and dogmatic theology, or the church’s logical apprehension of the doctrines of salvation, unfolded itself in this conflict with heresy; as the apologetic literature and martyrdom had arisen through Jewish and heathen persecution. From this time forth the distinction between catholic and heretical, orthodoxy and heterodoxy, the faith of the church and dissenting private opinion, became steadily more prominent. Every doctrine which agreed with the holy scriptures and the faith of the church, was received as catholic; that is, universal, and exclusive.935 Whatever deviated materially from this standard, every arbitrary notion, framed by this or that individual, every distortion or corruption of the revealed doctrines of Christianity, every departure from the public sentiment of the church, was considered heresy..936 Almost all the church fathers came out against the contemporary heresies, with arguments from scripture, with the tradition of the church, and with rational demonstration, proving them inwardly inconsistent and absurd.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  In 1517 he copied with his own hand very neatly the Epistles of Paul and the Hebrews in a little book for constant and convenient use. The text is taken from the first edition of Erasmus, which appeared in March, 1516, and corrects some typographical errors. It is very legible and uniform, and betrays an experienced hand; the marginal notes, in Latin, from Erasmus and patristic commentators, are very small and almost illegible. On the last page he added the following note in Greek: — "These Epistles were written at Einsiedeln of the blessed Mother of God by Huldreich Zwingli, a Swiss of Toggenburg, in the year one thousand five hundred and seventeen of the Incarnation, in the month of June.33 Happily ended."34 At the same time he began at Einsiedeln to attack from the pulpit certain abuses and the sale of indulgences, when Samson crossed the Alps in August, 1518. He says that he began to preach the gospel before Luther’s name was known in Switzerland, adding, however, that at that time he depended too much on Jerome and other Fathers instead of the Scriptures. He told Cardinal Schinner in 1517 that popery had poor foundation in the Scriptures. Myconius, Bullinger, and Capito report, in substantial agreement, that Zwingli preached in Einsiedeln against abuses, and taught the people to worship Christ, and not the Virgin Mary. The inscription on the entrance gate of the convent, promising complete remission of sins, was taken down at his instance.35 Beatus Rhenanus, in a letter of Dec. 6, 1518, applauds his attack upon Samson, the restorer of indulgences, and says that Zwingli preached to the people the purest philosophy of Christ from the fountain.36 On the strength of these testimonies, many historians date the Swiss Reformation from 1516, one year before that of Luther, which began Oct. 31, 1517. But Zwingli’s preaching at Einsiedeln had no such consequences as Luther’s Theses. He was not yet ripe for his task, nor placed on the proper field of action. He was at that time simply an Erasmian or advanced liberal in the Roman Church, laboring for higher education rather than religious renovation, and had no idea of a separation. He enjoyed the full confidence of the abbot, the bishop of Constance, Cardinal Schinner, and even the Pope. At Schinner’s recommendation, he was offered an annual pension of fifty guilders from Rome as an encouragement in the pursuit of his studies, and he actually received it for about five years (from 1515 to 1520). Pucci, the papal nuncio at Zurich, in a letter dated Aug. 24, 1518, appointed him papal chaplain (Accolitus Capellanus), with all the privileges and honors of that position, assigning as the reason "his splendid virtues and merits," and promising even higher dignities.37 He also offered to double his pension, and to give him in addition a canonry in Basle or Coire, on condition that he should promote the papal cause.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  Church festivals are multiplied and celebrated with great pomp; and not exclusively in honor of Christ, but in connection with an extravagant veneration of martyrs and saints, which borders on idolatry, and often reminds us of the heathen hero-worship not yet uprooted from the general mind. The multiplication and accumulation of religious ceremonies impressed the senses and the imagination, but prejudiced simplicity, spirituality, and fervor in the worship of God. Hence also the beginnings of reaction against ceremonialism and formalism. Notwithstanding the complete and sudden change of the social and political circumstances of the church, which meets us on the threshold of this period, we have still before us the natural, necessary continuation of the pre-Constantine church in its light and shade, and the gradual transition of the old Graeco-Roman Catholicism into the Germano-Roman Catholicism of the middle age. Our attention will now for the first time be turned in earnest, not only to Christianity in the Roman empire, but also to Christianity among the Germanic barbarians, who from East and North threaten the empire and the entire civilization of classic antiquity. The church prolonged, indeed, the existence of the Roman empire, gave it a new splendor and elevation, new strength and unity, as well as comfort in misfortune; but could not prevent its final dissolution, first in the West (A.D. 476), afterwards (1453) in the East. But she herself survived the storms of the great migration, brought the pagan invaders under the influence of Christianity, taught the barbarians the arts of peace, planted a higher civilization upon the ruins of the ancient world, and thus gave new proof of the indestructible, all-subduing energy of her life. In a minute history of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries we should mark the following subdivisions: 1. The Constantinian and Athanasian, or the Nicene and Trinitarian age, from 311 to the second general council in 381, distinguished by the conversion of Constantine, the alliance of the empire with the church, and the great Arian and semi-Arian controversy concerning the Divinity of Christ and the Holy Spirit. 2. The post-Nicene, or Christological and Augustinian age, extending to the fourth general council in 451, and including the Nestorian and Eutychian disputes on the person of Christ, and the Pelagian controversy on sin and grace. 3. The age of Leo the Great (440–461), or the rise of the papal supremacy in the West, amidst the barbarian devastations which made an end to the western Roman empire in 476. 4. The Justinian age (527–565), which exhibits the Byzantine state-church despotism at the height of its power, and at the beginning of its decline. 5. The Gregorian age (590–604) forms the transition from the ancient Graeco-Roman to the mediaeval Romano-Germanic Christianity, and will be more properly included in the church history of the middle ages.

• From How the Bible Actually Works (2019)

  baseball, just substitute some worthless activity, like tennis or gardening. Just trust me. It’s changed. If you entered a time machine and brought back players from the 1920s and 1930s, like Babe Ruth or Lou Gehrig, and put them in today’s starting lineup, they would be like lost children. You can never rest on past tradition. Success requires adapting tradition to survive. That’s the wise thing to do. I’d like to thank the Yankees for helping me sum up a central point of the book, but this brings me to a question that maybe some of you have already been asking: “At what point do we cross the line from adapting a tradition, so it can survive, to compromising the tradition beyond recognition?” That is the big question, I think. And answering that question has been the struggle of Jewish and Christian theology since forever. When Major League Baseball uniforms went from their traditional wool/wool blends to double-knit polyester in the early 1970s, the Yankees followed the trend. No biggie. The Yankee tradition is still intact. But what if they moved to Wyoming and called themselves the Cowpokes? Or changed their uniforms from home pinstripes and away gray to green, gold, and red? Then all hell—every square inch of it—would break loose. Sometimes reading the New Testament feels like moving to Wyoming rather than switching to polyester uniforms. I’m probably stretching the baseball analogy (and I don’t care), but I’m doing my best to get across something about the New Testament that is so very crucial but also often misunderstood, if not ignored and resisted. The Jesus movement owes its existence to a thousand and more years of Israelite and Jewish tradition. There is no wavering from that point among the New Testament writers, and any attempt to build a thick wall between the gospel and the Old Testament would be like saying the study of the space–time continuum owes nothing to Einstein. But as great as Einstein was, his theories didn’t anticipate quantum physics, the study of the weird world of very, very small atomic and subatomic particles. In fact, Einstein didn’t know what to do with all of that (which is probably the only thing I have in common with Einstein). The New Testament writers were quite often on a very different page from those in the long tradition that birthed the Jesus movement—not always, but often, and at crucial moments. Even if we take into account the diversity of that Jewish tradition, which we’ve seen within the Old Testament and in the Judaism that followed, still, the New Testament writers talk about Jesus in ways that the tradition didn’t anticipate and that stretches the tradition to the breaking point. The New Testament writers clearly respected and revered their deep Jewish

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  The comparative indifference and partial aversion of the Christians to the affairs of the state, to civil legislation and administration exposed them to the frequent reproach and contempt of the heathens. Their want of patriotism was partly the result of their superior devotion to the church as their country, partly of their situation in a hostile world. It must not be attributed to an "indolent or criminal disregard for the public welfare" (as Gibbon intimates), but chiefly to their just abhorrence of the innumerable idolatrous rites connected with the public and private life of the heathens. While they refused to incur the guilt of idolatry, they fervently and regularly prayed for the emperor and the state, their enemies and persecutors.620 They were the most peaceful subjects, and during this long period of almost constant provocation, abuse, and persecutions, they never took part in those frequent insurrections and rebellions which weakened and undermined the empire. They renovated society from within, by revealing in their lives as well as in their doctrine a higher order of private and public virtue, and thus proved themselves patriots in the best sense of the word.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  3. Tertullian is the first to make that comparison of the church with Noah’s ark, which has since become classical in Roman catholic theology; and he likewise attributes heresies to the devil, without any qualification. But as to schism, he was himself guilty of it since he joined the Montanists and bitterly opposed the Catholics in questions of discipline. He has therefore no place in the Roman Catholic list of the patres, but simply of the scriptores ecclesiae. 4. Even Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, with all their spiritualistic and idealizing turn of mind, are no exception here. The latter, in the words: "Out of the church no man can be saved,"239 brings out the principle of the catholic exclusiveness as unequivocally as Cyprian. Yet we find in him, together with very severe judgments of heretics, mild and tolerant expressions also; and he even supposes, on the ground of Rom. 2:6 sqq., that in the future life honest Jews and heathens will attain a suitable reward, a low grade of blessedness, though not the "life everlasting" in the proper sense. In a later age he was himself condemned as a heretic. Of other Greek divines of the third century, Methodius in particular, an opponent of Origen, takes high views of the church, and in his Symposion poetically describes it as "the garden of God in the beauty of eternal spring, shining in the richest splendor of immortalizing fruits and flowers;" as the virginal, unspotted, ever young and beautiful royal bride of the divine Logos. 5. Finally, Cyprian, in his Epistles, and most of all in his classical tract: De Unitate Eccelesiae, written in the year 251, amidst the distractions of the Novatian schism, and not without an intermixture of hierarchical pride and party spirit, has most distinctly and most forcibly developed the old catholic doctrine of the church, her unity, universality, and exclusiveness. He is the typical champion of visible, tangible church unity, and would have made a better pope than any pope before Leo I.; yet after all he was anti-papal and anti-Roman when he differed from the pope. Augustin felt this inconsistency, and thought that he had wiped it out by the blood of his martyrdom. But he never gave any sign of repentance. His views are briefly as follows:

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  They had a correct feeling of a difference between a confession of doctrine which may be improved from time to time with the progress of religious knowledge, and a rule of faith which remains unchanged. A confession of the Church has relative authority as norma normata, and depends upon its agreement with the Holy Scriptures, which have absolute authority as norma normans. II. The Second Helvetic Confession, 1566. This is far more important than the first, and obtained authority beyond the limits of Switzerland. In the intervening thirty years Calvin had developed his theological system, and the Council of Trent had formulated the modern Roman creed. Bullinger prepared this Confession in 1562 for his private use, as a testimony of the faith in which he had lived and wished to die. Two years afterwards, during the raging of the pestilence, he elaborated it more fully, in the daily expectation of death, and added it to his last will and testament, which was to be delivered to the magistracy of Zürich after his decease. But events in Germany gave to this private creed a public character. The pious elector of the Palatinate, Frederick III., being threatened by the Lutherans with exclusion from the treaty of peace on account of his secession to the Reformed Church and the publication of the Heidelberg Catechism (1563), requested Bullinger in 1565 to prepare a full and clear exposition of the Reformed faith, that he might answer the charges of heresy and dissension so constantly brought against the same. Bullinger sent him a manuscript copy of his confession. The Elector was so much pleased with it that he desired to have it translated and published in Latin and German before the Imperial Diet, which was to assemble at Augsburg in 1566 and to act on his alleged apostasy, In the meantime the Swiss felt the need of such a Confession as a closer bond of union. The First Helvetic Confession was deemed too short, and the Zürich Consensus of 1549 and the Geneva Consensus of 1552 treated only two articles, namely, the Lord’s Supper and predestination. Conferences were held, and Beza came in person to Zürich to take part in the work. Bullinger freely consented to a few changes, and prepared also the German version. Geneva, Bern, Schaffhausen, Biel, the Grisons, St. Gall, and Mühlhausen expressed their agreement. Basel alone, which had its own confession, declined for a long time, but ultimately acceded. The new Confession was published at Zürich, March 12, 1566, in both languages, at public expense, and was forwarded to the Elector of the Palatinate and to Philip of Hesse. A French translation appeared soon afterwards in Geneva under the care of Beza. In the same year the Elector Frederick made such a manly and noble defence of his faith before the Diet at Augsburg, that even his Lutheran opponents were filled with admiration for his piety, and thought no longer of impeaching him for heresy.

• From Quiet (2012)

  Those who live the most fully realized lives—giving back to their families, societies, and ultimately themselves—tend to find meaning in their obstacles. In a sense, McAdams has breathed new life into one of the great insights of Western mythology: that where we stumble is where our treasure lies. For many introverts like David, adolescence is the great stumbling place, the dark and tangled thicket of low self-esteem and social unease. In middle and high school, the main currency is vivacity and gregariousness; attributes like depth and sensitivity don’t count for much. But many introverts succeed in composing life stories much like David’s: our Charlie Brown moments are the price we have to pay to bang our drums happily through the decades. * Some who read this book before publication commented that the quote from Isabel couldn’t possibly be accurate—“no second grader talks that way!” But this is what she said.

• From History of the Christian Church: The Complete Set of Eight Volumes (1858)

  In doctrine, Montanism agreed in all essential points with the Catholic Church, and held very firmly to the traditional rule of faith.766 Tertullian was thoroughly orthodox according to the standard of his age. He opposed infant baptism on the assumption that mortal sins could not be forgiven after baptism; but infant baptism was not yet a catholic dogma, and was left to the discretion of parents. He contributed to the development of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, by asserting against Patripassianism a personal distinction in God, and the import of the Holy Spirit. Montanism was rooted neither, like Ebionism, in Judaism, nor, like Gnosticism, in heathenism, but in Christianity; and its errors consist in a morbid exaggeration of Christian ideas and demands. Tertullian says, that the administration of the Paraclete consists only in the reform of discipline, in deeper understanding of the Scriptures, and in effort after higher perfection; that it has the same faith, the same God, the same Christ, and the same sacraments with the Catholics. The sect combated the Gnostic heresy with all decision, and forms the exact counterpart of that system, placing Christianity chiefly in practical life instead of theoretical speculation, and looking for the consummation of the kingdom of God on this earth, though not till the millennium, instead of transferring it into an abstract ideal world. Yet between these two systems, as always between opposite extremes, there were also points of contact; a common antagonism, for example, to the present order of the world, and the distinction of a pneumatic and a psychical church. Tertullian conceived religion as a process of development, which he illustrates by the analogy of organic growth in nature. He distinguishes in this process four stages:—(1.) Natural religion, or the innate idea of God; (2.) The legal religion of the Old Testament; (3.) The gospel during the earthly life of Christ; and (4.) the revelation of the Paraclete; that is, the spiritual religion of the Montanists, who accordingly called themselves the pneumatics, or the spiritual church, in distinction from the psychical (or carnal) Catholic church. This is the first instance of a theory of development which assumes an advance beyond the New Testament and the Christianity of the apostles; misapplying the parables of the mustard seed and the leaven, and Paul’s doctrine of the growth of the church in Christ (but not beyond Christ). Tertullian, however, was by no means rationalistic in his view. On the contrary, he demanded for all new revelations the closest agreement with the traditional faith of the church, the regula fidei, which, in a genuine Montanistic work, he terms "immobilis et irreformabilis." Nevertheless he gave the revelations of the Phrygian prophets on matters of practice an importance which interfered with the sufficiency of the Scriptures. II.

• From Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years, Part 3 (451 – 1500) (2009)

  At issue was how far the Ethiopian Church was prepared to travel in its own direction and ignore what links it had with the wider world: monks of the House of Ewostatewos rejected ordination by the abun, and it is possible that they might have ended up as separate from their parent Christianity as that other independent-minded Ethiopian movement, the Falasha (see pp. 243–4). The triumph of the Sabbath was sealed by devoted advocacy from one of Ethiopia’s most remarkable monarchs, Zar’a Ya’qob (reigned 1434–68), who combined military success with intense piety, himself writing works of Christian instruction for his subjects. Thanks to Zar’a Ya’qob, Ethiopia’s effective rule extended once more to the coast of the Red Sea, and despite the Negus’s pride in the special character of Ethiopian devotion, he was intensely aware of his links with a wider world; he took the regnal name Constantine. There was a great sensation in Europe when a delegation of two monks from the Ethiopian monastery in Jerusalem arrived in 1441 at the Pope’s council at Florence (see pp. 492–3) and uttered the name of their far-distant monarch – this was the same council which also received representations from the beleaguered Copts. Zar’a Ya’qob also derived great spiritual comfort from an unlikely source, a short popular work of devotion called The Miracles of Mary, which seems to have been compiled for use in Marian shrines in France in the twelfth century; having gained great popularity in western Europe, it had been translated into Arabic and then into Ethiopic. The Negus made it a mandatory work of devotion for his clergy: a strange stray from an alien world which he nevertheless found a useful tool in moulding his people to a single style of faith, and Marian devotion was hugely reinforced in the Ethiopian Church.59 Less indebted to French devotional style was Zar’a Ya’qob’s decree that all his subjects should be tattooed on their foreheads with the words ‘Father, Son and Holy Spirit’ and on their right and left hands respectively ‘I deny the Devil’ and ‘I am a servant of Mary’. Ethiopian Christian tattooing still characteristically features a cross in blue on the chin or the forehead.60 Zar’a Ya’qob was determined that religious divisions should not undermine his newly extended empire, and key to this was a full understanding between the Solomonic monarchy and the awkward monks of the House of Ewostatewos. This was achieved at a major council of the Ethiopian Church summoned to the Negus’s newly founded monastery of Däbra Mitmaq in 1449, at which the main agreement was that both the Sabbath and Sunday should henceforth be observed. In return, monks of the House of Ewostatewos agreed to be reconciled to the abun and accept ordination at his hands; so the forces of Ethiopian particularism were not terminally separated from the Church’s link to the wider Christian world. It was an important moment for the future of Ethiopian Christianity, a

• From Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years, Part 3 (451 – 1500) (2009)

  attributed to Gudit through their indestructibility. It is said that King Lalibela conceived the idea of recreating Jerusalem in his capital after a visit to the Holy Land, in an effort to compensate for the renewed fall of the Holy City to Muslim armies in 1187 (see p. 385). As so often in Ethiopian history, it is impossible to know whether centuries of subsequent meditation, wishful thinking and purposeful political rebranding have overlaid whatever original scheme was intended at Lalibela, to produce its present rich skein of associations with Jerusalem – the Church of Golgotha now includes two tombs designated respectively for Jesus Christ and King Lalibela, and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre lies at the heart of the Lalibela complex.51 What is clear is that this wave of new monuments to Ethiopian Christian confidence was followed by a major expansion of Christian life in a renewal of monasticism. Monks founded their communities for the first time in the central highlands, usually deliberately seizing pre-Christian holy sites, and they displayed all the heroic feats of ascetic self-denial which had been pioneered in Syria and Egypt. They were at the heart of two centuries and more which were another golden age of Ethiopian Christianity, as well as one of its greatest periods of contention and struggle.52 At the end of the thirteenth century, another dynasty supplanted the Zagwe, and between its founder, Yekuno Amlak (reigned 1270–85), and his grandson Amdä Seyon (reigned 1314–44), it came to restore the military might of Ethiopia. It appears that the Egyptian Coptic Church was affronted at the usurpation and refused to supply an abun, so for some considerable time the Ethiopians had to resort to bishops from Syria to preserve their episcopal succession.53 Such internationally expressed doubts needed addressing and a sustained campaign began to plug the dynasty into ancient history, with the aid of King Solomon: Amdä Seyon’s name (‘Pillar of Zion’) was no casual reference. It may thus be that this was the stage at which the Ethiopian Church’s identification with Israel really began to become distinctive. The existence of the Kebra Nagast may have been the inspiration for this stratagem, and it is likely that its present literary form dates largely to around 1300.54 Later tradition represents a vital element in Negus Yekuno’s support as his understanding with the chief activist in the expansion of monasteries, the monk from Däbra Damo, Iyäsus Mo’a (‘Jesus has prevailed’). It is a plausible but also a convenient story, since the monks were to prove a constant source of difficulty for the ‘Solomonic’ dynasty, through their independent charismatic authority and individual opinions. The chief disciple of Iyäsus Mo’a, Täklä Haymanot (‘Plant of Faith’), was a formidable ascetic, said to have spent a considerable proportion of his life standing on one leg in his monastic cell, feeding on one seed brought by a bird once a year. When the other leg atrophied away, God rewarded the

• From White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America (2016)

  planters’ engrossment of vast tracts of land. He championed a bill that would have sold land directly from the federal government to squatters at low prices. He also opposed the practice of having courts hire out insolvent debtors to work off fees—an updated variation on indentured servitude. Crockett spoke “Cracker” fluently, as was demonstrated in the 1830 dictionary that gave him full credit for coining the phrase “ring-tale roarer” to describe a violent man. 34 Crockett’s boasting carried unambiguous class accents. In 1828, he claimed that he could “wade the Mississippi with a steamboat on his back” and “whip his weight in wild cats.” The one thing he said he couldn’t do was to give a standard speech in Congress—which felt odd to him, given that he otherwise believed he could whip any man in the House. He lacked the eloquence that was taught, the argumentation that the educated class possessed. His humorous speeches gained public notoriety, but for many observers he remained the “harlequin,” provoking laughter. According to one newspaper, queer stories and quaint sayings turned Crockett into a dancing bear, dressed up in “coat and breeches,” performing a vulgar sideshow. 35 The real Crockett was often eclipsed by the tall tales of the untutored backwoodsman. An entire cottage industry of Crockett stories were published that he never authorized. Davy Crockett’s Almanack of 1837 contains a crude engraving of a corn cracker, who appears unshaven, is dressed in buckskin, and holds a rifle in his hand. He is topped off with a grisly-looking coonskin cap, the animal’s head still attached (see page 121 ). In another engraving, Davy’s daughter is mounted on a giant alligator’s back, riding the thirty-seven-foot beast like a rodeo star. Whether he fights modern-day dragons or accomplishes magical feats in a surreal hinterland, Crockett’s savage instincts seem appropriate to a mock-chivalric epic. His ghostwriters and hack biographers made Crockett into a wild man and an ill-educated braggart, and yet they equally relished his over-the-top swagger in outmaneuvering steamboats, bears, and slippery town folk. 36 His boastfulness was never seen in purely heroic terms. He might jump higher and “squat lower” than “all the fellers either side of the Alleghany hills,” but his comic character actually served to mute a legitimate political voice. Representative Crockett may have compared speculators to sneaky coons in an 1824 speech before the Tennessee House, but he never lost sight of the legal ploys used to trick poorer settlers out of their land warrants. In the end, the man, not the legend, did a better job of exposing class conflict in the backcountry, where real speculators were routinely pitted against real squatters. 37

• From A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (BDB) (1907)

  3. a. fig. = royal dignity, authority, power, וְכסְאי נָקי‎ WoT 2S 14°; וּלכ'‎ invads yds sy 1K 2®; esp. kingdom, c. vbs. of setting up, establishing, י'‎ subj., 1772 OPT 28 3% וּבָנִיתִי‎ ץ כסְאף‎ 89% so 6. OW ;"צ‎ king subj., WD IND} TON2 Pr 20%; pass. נכון‎ MW NID 1K 2* the throne of David shall be established, 61.2 7" =1Ch17™; “3 וְהוּבֶן בַּחֶסָּד‎ Is 16° (of Mess. reign); so (in gen.) יָכּון כ'‎ 7PIYA Pr 165 ef. 25° 29"; intrans. (c. 7%) y 89”; more fully, / subj. IADB} אֶתדכ'‎ 123) 2 S 7 כסאו)‎ 133 in || x Ch rz"), מַמְלַכְתְּף על"‎ ‘any snbpm NIM) 1 א‎ 9% cf. || 2Ch7® and וְהכִינוּתִי כ'‎ sory מלכוּת\‎ 1 Ch 22"; also ץ מגר כ'‎ 8* cast down throne, of Gentile nations ’3 A357} מַמִלְכוּת‎ He 2"; עלדב/‎ IW sit on the throne of any one (esp. David) = be his successor 1 K y817.20.24.27.055.48 52 46 > K 13" esp, Je 13" 17 22°+5t. Je; 1 ישבוּ לב‎ yw 132”; more fully 1 Ch 29”; 109. הוּשיב עלדב'‎ 1K 2% Re aK 10°; 35 השיב‎ fig. Jb 36’, of placing in honour; אֶשִית לב ל‎ 4202 BD ישב + ;"132 ץ‎ עולהב'‎ also = take one’s seat as king, become actual king, possess royalty ד‎ K 16", oft. sit on the throne of Isr. 1K 8° = 2 Ch6”™®, 1K to’ 2K "סז‎ 15", Je 33”; without ישב‎ 1 K 24 9% cf. also Is 9° (Mess.); inadn0 ישב על-כסא‎ | Dt 17", הַמלוּבָה‎ nosy 1K 1°, and even naw barby י'‎ modo xpanby 1 Ch 28°; also ישב‎ עלדכ' הַמַלְכִים‎ 2K 115%, || 73707 כ'‎ 2Ch23%, of (royal) throne as judgment seat Pr 20% cf. also y 122°; set one upon the throne of Isr. עלדכ' יש'‎ ’p נתן‎ 1 K 10? ef. || 2 Ch 9°; in com- par. sentence מָכּ'‎ IND3“NS יִל‎ i.e. make him amore powerful king than, 1K 1”, cf. "צ‎ ; of king of Babylon, *8D3 OOS x7 33195 Sy ז גד‎ 4%. In y457 0) אלהים‎ FNDD the text is prob. corrupt: AE HiEw Bae read thy throne is (a throne) of God; Bi Che insert נכונה יסודתו‎ הקיממו‎ thy throne | its foundation is firmly fixed], God [has*established it]; v. further 191-579 9% +b. throne of (אלהים) י'‎ = his royal dignity, sovereignty, La 5" 937103" (’3 p30; || (מַלְבוּת‎ : WI? כ'‎ Je 4"; WI ITY Wr ץ‎ 47°; NO? מְכוּן‎ HEV PTY ץ‎ 89° cf. 97”. jae [103] vb. cover (NH 702 Pi; Aram, SDD chiefly Pa; kms Pa. hide, cover; limo covering, פבם--\[‎ | garment; Ar, ו‎ ( aes) 491 כסה situ, garment DI*¥***)—Qal, only Pé. act.

• From The Ultimate Guide to Orgasm for Women: How to Become Orgasmic for a Lifetime (2011)

  I have devoted much of this chapter to the importance of letting go in order to have good sex; letting go of preconceptions, of inhibitions, of needing things to be a certain way, of having goals, of emotional stresses and tensions. The actual physical experience of orgasm also requires a letting go, but in its earlier phases it usually requires a physical buildup of muscular tension. This physical tension is often necessary and should be facilitated, not avoided. The explosion of orgasm comes when the tension in my legs is released and my clitoris pulses rapidly. Our sexual responses are innate and natural, but sex is not an individual thing, it is interactive. It occurs in a social context, in a cultural matrix, which predetermines some of our sexual dynamics. Learning to recognize those dynamics can help us to make positive choices. A great deal of what I’m talking about here can be summed up as developing a sense of self-esteem, a sense of yourself as a worthy individual. In the end, that knowing of oneself as valuable without requiring any external input is the basis of leading a fulfilling life—which includes fulfilling sex. Asserting Ourselves It is so easy to let things slide, to maintain our lives and relationships the way they always have been, rather than taking the steps to change things for the better. Failing to say no or to take the initiative when you’ve never done either before may not seem like a problem. It is a problem if it means that you are enduring mediocrity in your life. And it is most definitely a problem if you are blaming someone else for that mediocrity. What happens is a common dynamic between couples: a woman isn’t happy with the relationship, but it doesn’t really occur to her that she can change it, or the effort of changing it seems too overwhelming, so she does nothing, but still feels resentful. She may end up blaming her partner for her sense of powerlessness because that is less risky than taking steps to change. If she has ten children and an abusive husband who controls all the money, she must be very careful not to incite him to violence. In this country, however, many women are in a position to take their power, and what prevents them is not so much real fear as it is the habit of abdicating responsibility. Of course, this relationship dynamic may be reversed, with the male partner being the one to abdicate responsibility.