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 19 of 174 · 20 per page

• From Available: The unfiltered and empowering new memoir for women about sex, dating and divorce after 40 (2021)

  It’s no longer imperative that I understand what someone else can provide for me, but that I unflinchingly hold close what I can provide for myself. I am a woman and a mother, but no longer a wife, no longer looking for the sure thing that’ll keep my life tidy, my future certain. I thought that going off script would crush me, but instead it has freed me to be fully present in my other roles as a mother, a lover, as a friend and as the author of my own story. AfterwordThere are only two groups of people I hope won’t read this book: my parents and my kids. It’s not that I have anything to hide, but I know how uncomfortable it is to imagine one’s kids or one’s parents having sex. You know abstractly that they’re doing so, but you don’t want to know what their sexuality looks like up close. One of the benefits for kids of their parents staying married is that their sexual identities are obliterated. It’s easy for them to pretend it isn’t happening or doesn’t exist, but when your parents are single and dating, you don’t have much of a choice but to accept that in all likelihood, sex is involved. I have never been bashful about intimate topics with my kids, openly discussing puberty, masturbation and birth control while they squirm and plead with me to stop talking. I don’t shy away from their burgeoning sexuality – I want them to take the subject of sex in stride, knowing it can be different things at different times, a sign of love and intimacy, or playful and fun. Recently, I told Daisy’s friends that I was their age when I started dating Michael and their jaws fell open – the concept of settling down anytime soon was unthinkable to them. “Don’t do what I did!” I admonished them. “Sleep with lots of people, find out what you like and always use a condom.” Some of the girls said they’d like to get married someday, and Daisy admitted she was interested in marriage mostly for the cake tasting during the wedding planning. I told her I would get her all the cake tastings she wanted and she could take her sweet time figuring herself out before she committed to another person. My kids may choose to read this book despite my forewarning not to, and I can’t stop them if curiosity gets the best of them. I hope they will take solace that I am whole, and maybe, just maybe, someday I can serve as a role model to them. My living life on my own terms and then publishing a book about it might be disquieting for them in this moment of time, but when they’re older and less easily embarrassed by me, they might be able to see that, like a phoenix rising from the ashes, I turned the most devastating period of my life into the richest one.

• From Available: The unfiltered and empowering new memoir for women about sex, dating and divorce after 40 (2021)

  It’s a work in progress, but that’s all I can ask of myself: put one foot in front of the other and keep moving forward. Divorce is an ending and a terribly painful one at that, but it’s also a beginning. My advice to anyone looking at that door and trying to decide whether it’s opening or closing is, don’t overthink it. Shave your legs, spritz on some perfume, don that lace thong you bought in an optimistic moment, slip into a pair of heels that make you feel sexy and bold, and let the momentum carry you ahead. I can’t answer easily the question that started this all: is this too much? It is, and it isn’t. It may be too much for other people, but I am enough for myself, neither too much, nor too little. I am on both sides of the seesaw, and only I can maintain the aerial trick of equilibrium for myself. I feel, I appreciate, I experience, I observe on a level many layers beneath the surface I used to placidly coast along, and I’m grateful for every second of it. AcknowledgementsThis is as close to an Oscar acceptance speech as I will ever get; like those actors that continue to talk over the closing music, I’m determined that no one will cut me off. I am thankful to a boatload of people and I intend to thank them all. My children expressed that they were proud of me as I wrote this book even as they shared their misgivings. I am sorry if I have embarrassed you in these pages, but each of you is a force to be reckoned with and you’ll be fine. I appreciate that you try to see me as my own person even though first and foremost what I am to you is your mother. I love you so much, and the love you return to me is the lifeboat in which I have bounced over some daunting waves. My mother, Carol Friedman, has been my ultimate role model and has always unconditionally loved, supported, and encouraged me to such an extent that I came to believe I could do just about anything (as long as it was safe and close to home). Thank you Mom for always having unabated faith in me. My soon-to-be ex-husband gave me love and security when I craved it above all else. You and I made a family together that will always bring us joy, and I am grateful to have you as a co-parent in the cockpit with me. Thank you for giving me your blessing to write this book. My father, Robert Friedman; my siblings, Jennifer Donohue and Matthew Friedman; and my sister-in-law Breeda Wool, have been an endless source of love and support for me and my kids.

• From Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity (2007)

  Among other things, she showed me how to use cosmetics to effectively cover my beard shadow, an invaluable skill for any crossdresser who wishes to be gendered by others as female. It’s common for people to dismiss crossdressers for what is perceived to be their exaggerated use of makeup. However, the truth of the matter is that crossdressers (unlike cissexual women) typically have beard shadows, which are perhaps the dominant visual cue we rely on when gendering people as male. While I would have preferred to have the privilege of forgoing makeup if I wished, my beard shadow made it virtually impossible for me to be regularly gendered as female without it. Complaints about how crossdressers overuse cosmetics are often related to more general critiques that claim that crossdressers exaggerate stereotypically feminine dress and behaviors, thus turning themselves into caricatures of women. Often, these sentiments are rooted in the oppositional sexist assumption that cissexual women are entitled to express and explore femininity while those assigned male are not. Even those critiques that are not downright oppositional sexist are still cissexual-woman-centric, in that they view MTF crossdressing solely in terms of how it portrays cissexual women, rather than viewing it from an MTF spectrum perspective. Back when I crossdressed, I very much enjoyed dressing and acting in a highly feminine manner, but not because I thought that women really were or should be that way. If I indulged in an exaggerated form of femininity, it was only because I never really had the chance to explore that side of myself growing up as a boy. I spent virtually every day of my life wearing T-shirts, jeans, sneakers, and no makeup. So for me, crossdressing represented a rare opportunity to fully indulge my femininity. The other factor at the time that motivated me to try to achieve stereotypical femininity was that I wanted others to gender me as female. Back when I was crossdressing—when I was still physically male—that never would have been possible had I gone out sans makeup or wearing unisex clothing. To a large extent, I purposely chose the clothing and cosmetics I wore when I crossdressed based on their ability to hide or play down my male physique and facial features. In fact, the public stage of my crossdressing was really the one time in my life when I did go out of my way to emulate how some women looked, walked, talked, moved, and so on. I found that this increased the likelihood that I would be gendered female, which was my overall goal, and which also ensured my safety.

• From Available: The unfiltered and empowering new memoir for women about sex, dating and divorce after 40 (2021)

  I’m proud of the life I’ve rebuilt for myself, but also often melancholy that I didn’t get to “have it all” in the way I thought I would when I was younger. I fervently hope that anyone who reads this book – whether middle-aged and newly single like me or just starting to dip their toes into the murky, alluring waters of relationships at any age, young or old – takes from it that it’s possible to have it all, if only you’re flexible about what that actually means. For most of my life, I believed that meant having a loving husband staunchly by my side, children, good health, financial stability, a cadre of loyal friends. That belief, embedded in me for decades, has not simply dissipated because my circumstances have changed. It’s a work in progress, but that’s all I can ask of myself: put one foot in front of the other and keep moving forward. Divorce is an ending and a terribly painful one at that, but it’s also a beginning. My advice to anyone looking at that door and trying to decide whether it’s opening or closing is, don’t overthink it. Shave your legs, spritz on some perfume, don that lace thong you bought in an optimistic moment, slip into a pair of heels that make you feel sexy and bold, and let the momentum carry you ahead. I can’t answer easily the question that started this all: is this too much? It is, and it isn’t. It may be too much for other people, but I am enough for myself, neither too much, nor too little. I am on both sides of the seesaw, and only I can maintain the aerial trick of equilibrium for myself. I feel, I appreciate, I experience, I observe on a level many layers beneath the surface I used to placidly coast along, and I’m grateful for every second of it. AcknowledgementsThis is as close to an Oscar acceptance speech as I will ever get; like those actors that continue to talk over the closing music, I’m determined that no one will cut me off. I am thankful to a boatload of people and I intend to thank them all. My children expressed that they were proud of me as I wrote this book even as they shared their misgivings. I am sorry if I have embarrassed you in these pages, but each of you is a force to be reckoned with and you’ll be fine. I appreciate that you try to see me as my own person even though first and foremost what I am to you is your mother. I love you so much, and the love you return to me is the lifeboat in which I have bounced over some daunting waves.

• From The Well of Loneliness (1928)

  Valérie, Brockett, indeed all her friends were whole-hearted in their congratulations; and David’s tail kept up a great wagging. He knew well that something pleasant had happened: the whole atmosphere of the house was enough to inform a sagacious person like David. Even Mary’s little bright-coloured birds seemed to take a firmer hold on existence; while out in the garden there was much ado on the part of the proudly parental pigeons—fledglings with huge heads and bleary eyes had arrived to contribute to the general celebration. Adèle went singing about her work, for Jean had recently been promised promotion, which meant that his savings, perhaps in a year, might have grown large enough for them to marry. Pierre bragged to his friend, the neighbouring baker, anent Stephen’s great eminence as a writer, and even Pauline cheered up a little. When Mary impressively ordered the meals, ordered this or that delicacy for Stephen, Pauline would actually say with a smile: ‘Mais oui, un grand génie doit nourrir le cerveau!’ Mademoiselle Duphot gained a passing importance in the eyes of her pupils through having taught Stephen. She would nod her head and remark very wisely: ‘I always declare she become a great author.’ Then because she was truthful she would hastily add: ‘I mean that I knowed she was someone unusual.’ Buisson admitted that perhaps, after all, it was well that Stephen had stuck to her writing. The book had been bought for translation into French, a fact which had deeply impressed Monsieur Buisson. From Puddle came a long and triumphant letter: ‘What did I tell you? I knew you’d do it! . . .’ Anna also wrote at some length to her daughter. And wonder of wonders, from Violet Peacock there arrived an embarrassingly gushing epistle. She would look Stephen up when next she was in Paris; she was longing, so she said, to renew their old friendship—after all, they two had been children together. Gazing at Mary with very bright eyes, Stephen’s thoughts must rush forward into the future. Puddle had been right, it was work that counted—clever, hard-headed, understanding old Puddle! Then putting an arm round Mary’s shoulder: ‘Nothing shall ever hurt you,’ she would promise, feeling wonderfully self-sufficient and strong, wonderfully capable of protecting.

• From The Well of Loneliness (1928)

  2Came the day when Stephen rode out with her father to a meet, a glorious and memorable day. Side by side the two of them jogged through the gates, and the lodgekeeper’s wife must smile to see Stephen sitting her smart bay pony astride, and looking so comically like Sir Philip. ‘It do be a pity as her isn’t a boy, our young lady,’ she told her husband. It was one of those still, slightly frosty mornings when the landing is tricky on the north side of the hedges; when the smoke from farm chimneys rises straight as a ramrod; when the scent of log fires or of burning brushwood, though left far behind, still persists in the nostrils. A crystal clear morning, like a draught of spring water, and such mornings are good when one is young. The pony tugged hard and fought at his bridle; he was trembling with pleasure for he was no novice; he knew all about signs and wonders in stables, such as large feeds of corn administered early, and extra long groomings, and pink coats with brass buttons, like the hunt coat Sir Philip was wearing. He frisked down the road, a mass of affectation, demanding some skill on the part of his rider; but the child’s hands were strong yet exceedingly gentle—she possessed that rare gift, perfect hands on a horse. ‘This is better than being young Nelson,’ thought Stephen, ‘ ’cause this way I’m happy just being myself.’ Sir Philip looked down at his daughter with contentment; she was good to look upon, he decided. And yet his contentment was not quite complete, so that he looked away again quickly, sighing a little, because, somehow these days, he had taken to sighing over Stephen. The meet was a large one. People noticed the child; Colonel Antrim, the Master, rode up and spoke kindly: ‘You’ve a fine pony there, but he’ll need a bit of holding!’ And then to her father: ‘Is she safe astride, Philip? Violet’s learning to ride, but side-saddle, I prefer it—I never think girl children get the grip astride; they aren’t built for it, haven’t the necessary muscle; still, no doubt she’ll stick on by balance.’ Stephen flushed: ‘No doubt she’ll stick on by balance!’ The words rankled, oh, very deeply they rankled. Violet was learning to ride side-saddle, that small, flabby lump who squealed if you pinched her; that terrified creature of muslins and ribbons and hair that curled over the nurse’s finger! Why, Violet could never come to tea without crying, could never play a game without getting herself hurt! She had fat, wobbly legs too, just like a rag doll—and you, Stephen, had been compared to Violet! Ridiculous of course, and yet all of a sudden you felt less impressive in your fine riding breeches. You felt—well, not foolish exactly, but self-conscious—not quite at your ease, a little bit wrong. It was almost as though you were playing at young Nelson again, were only pretending.

• From The Well of Loneliness (1928)

  Arm in arm they passed out through the heavy swing doors and into Stephen’s waiting motor. Burton smiled above the white favour in his coat; the crowd, craning their necks, were also smiling. Arrived back at the house, Stephen, Mary, and Burton must drink the health of the bride and bridegroom. Then Pierre thanked his employer for all she had done in giving his daughter so splendid a wedding. But when that employer was no longer present, when Mary had followed her into the study, the baker’s wife lifted quizzical eyebrows. ‘Quel type! On dirait plutôt un homme; ce n’est pas celle-là qui trouvera un mari!’ The guests laughed. ‘Mais oui, elle est joliment bizarre’; and they started to make little jokes about Stephen. Pierre flushed as he leaped to Stephen’s defence. ‘She is good, she is kind, and I greatly respect her and so does my wife—while as for our daughter, Adèle here has very much cause to be grateful. Moreover she gained the Croix de Guerre through serving our wounded men in the trenches.’ The baker nodded. ‘You are quite right, my friend—precisely what I myself said this morning.’ But Stephen’s appearance was quickly forgotten in the jollification of so much fine feasting—a feasting for which her money had paid, for which her thoughtfulness had provided. Jokes there were, but no longer directed at her—they were harmless, well meant if slightly broad jokes made at the expense of the bashful bridegroom. Then before even Pauline had realized the time, there was Burton strolling into the kitchen, and Adèle must rush off to change her dress, while Jean must change also, but in the pantry. Burton glanced at the clock. ‘Faut dépêcher vous, ’urry, if you’re going to catch that chemin de fer,’ he announced as one having authority. ‘It’s a goodish way to the Guard de Lions.’

• From The Well of Loneliness (1928)

  She held up her hand, commanding silence; commanding that slow, quiet voice to cease speaking, and she said: ‘As my father loved you, I loved. As a man loves a woman, that was how I loved—protectively, like my father. I wanted to give all I had in me to give. It made me feel terribly strong . . . and gentle. It was good, good, good—I’d have laid down my life a thousand times over for Angela Crossby. If I could have, I’d have married her and brought her home—I wanted to bring her home here to Morton. If I loved her the way a man loves a woman, it’s because I can’t feel that I am a woman. All my life I’ve never felt like a woman, and you know it—you say you’ve always disliked me, that you’ve always felt a strange physical repulsion. . . . I don’t know what I am; no one’s ever told me that I’m different and yet I know that I’m different—that’s why, I suppose, you’ve felt as you have done. And for that I forgive you, though whatever it is, it was you and my father who made this body—but what I will never forgive is your daring to try and make me ashamed of my love. I’m not ashamed of it, there’s no shame in me.’ And now she was stammering a little wildly, ‘Good and—and fine it was,’ she stammered, ‘the best part of myself—I gave all and I asked nothing in return—I just went on hopelessly loving—’ she broke off, she was shaking from head to foot, and Anna’s cold voice fell like icy water on that angry and sorely tormented spirit. ‘You have spoken, Stephen. I don’t think there’s much more that needs to be said between us except this, we two cannot live together at Morton—not now, because I might grow to hate you. Yes, although you’re my child, I might grow to hate you. The same roof mustn’t shelter us both any more; one of us must go—which of us shall it be?’ And she looked at Stephen and waited. Morton! They could not both live at Morton. Something seemed to catch hold of the girl’s heart and twist it. She stared at her mother, aghast for a moment, while Anna stared back—she was waiting for her answer. But quite suddenly Stephen found her manhood and she said: ‘I understand. I’ll leave Morton.’

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

  With unabated rigor of conviction, he replied to the supreme pontiff that of all men he was most under obligation to obey the law of Christ, that Christ was of all men the most poor, and subject to mundane authority. No Christian man has a right to follow Peter, Paul or any of the saints except as they imitated Christ. The pope should renounce all worldly authority and compel his clergy to do the same. He then asserted that, if in these views he was found to err, he was willing to be corrected, even by death. If it were in his power to do anything to advance these views by his presence in Rome, he would willingly go thither. But God had put an obstacle in his way, and had taught him to obey Him rather than man. He closed with the prayer that God might incline Urban to imitate Christ in his life and teach his clergy to do the same. While saying mass in his church, he was struck again with paralysis, and passed away two or three days after, Dec. 29, 1384, "having lit a fire which shall never be put out."573 Fuller, writing of his death, exclaims, "Admirable that a hare, so often hunted with so many packs of dogs, should die quietly sitting in his form." Wyclif was spare, and probably never of robust health, but he was not an ascetic. He was fond of a good meal. In temper he was quick, in mind clear, in moral character unblemished. Towards his enemies he was sharp, but never coarse or ribald. William Thorpe, a young contemporary standing in the court of Archbishop Arundel, bore testimony that "he was emaciated in body and well-nigh destitute of strength, and in conduct most innocent. Very many of the chief men of England conferred with him, loved him dearly, wrote down his sayings and followed his manner of life."574 The prevailing sentiment of the hierarchy was given by Walsingham, chronicler of St. Albans, who characterized the Reformer in these words: "On the feast of the passion of St. Thomas of Canterbury, John de Wyclif, that instrument of the devil, that enemy of the Church, that author of confusion to the common people, that image of hypocrites, that idol of heretics, that author of schism, that sower of hatred, that coiner of lies, being struck with the horrible judgment of God, was smitten with palsy and continued to live till St. Sylvester’s Day, on which he breathed out his malicious spirit into the abodes of darkness." The dead was not left in peace. By the decree of Arundel, Wyclif’s writings were suppressed, and it was so effective that Caxton and the first English printers issued no one of them from the press.

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

  At D’Ailly’s promotion to the episcopate, 1395, his pupil fell heir to both his offices, the offices of professor of theology and chancellor of the university. In the discussion over the healing of the schism in which the university took the leading part, he occupied a place of first prominence, and by tracts, sermons and public memorials directed the opinion of the Church in this pressing matter. The premise from which he started out was that the peace of the Church is an essential condition to the fulfilment of its mission. This view he set forth in a famous sermon, preached in 1404 at Tarascon before Benedict XIII. and the duke of Orleans. Princes and prelates, he declared, both owe obedience to law. The end for which the Church was constituted is the peace and well-being of men. All Church authority is established to subserve the interests of peace. Peace is so great a boon that all should be ready to renounce dignities and position for it. Did not Christ suffer shame? Better for a while to be without a pope than that the Church should observe the canons and not have peace, for there can be salvation where there is no pope.385 A general council should be convened, and it was pious to believe that in the treatment of the schism it would not err—pium est credere non erraret. As Schwab has said, no one had ever preached in the same way to a pope before. The sermon caused a sensation.

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

  Yea, by being unduly concerned about their movements in the presence of the Lord’s body, they miss receiving him spiritually. Men glide, he says, through fasting, prayer, vigils and other exercises, and take so much delight in them that God has a very small part in their hearts, or no part in them at all.474 In insisting upon the exercise of a simple faith, it seems almost impossible to avoid the conclusion that Tauler took an attitude of intentional opposition to the prescient and self-confident methods of scholasticism. It is better to possess a simple faith—einfaltiger Glaube — than to vainly pry into the secrets of God, asking questions about the efflux and reflux of the Aught and Nought, or about the essence of the soul’s spark. The Arians and Sabellians had a marvellous intellectual understanding of the Trinity, and Solomon and Origen interested the Church in a marvellous way, but what became of them we know not. The chief thing is to yield oneself to God’s will and to follow righteousness with sincerity of purpose. "Wisdom is not studied in Paris, but in the sufferings of the Lord," Tauler said. The great masters of Paris read large books, and that is well. But the people who dwell in the inner kingdom of the soul read the true Book of Life. A pure heart is the throne of the Supreme Judge, a lamp bearing the eternal light, a treasury of divine riches, a storehouse of heavenly sweetness, the sanctuary of the only begotten Son.475 A distinctly democratic element showed itself in Tauler’s piety and preaching which is very attractive. He put honor upon all legitimate toil, and praised good and faithful work as an expression of true religion. One, he said, "can spin, another can make shoes, and these are the gifts of the Holy Ghost; and I tell you that, if I were not a priest, I should esteem it a great gift to be able to make shoes, and would try to make them so well as to become a pattern to all." Fidelity in one’s avocation is more than attendance upon church. He spoke of a peasant whom he knew well for more than forty years. On being asked whether he should give up his work and go and sit in church, the Lord replied no, he should win his bread by the sweat of his brow, and thus he would honor his own precious blood. The sympathetic element in his piety excluded the hard spirit of dogmatic complacency. "I would rather bite my tongue," Tauler said, "till it bleed, than pass judgment upon any man.

• From The Well of Loneliness (1928)

  4Puddle’s prophecy proved to have been correct, work was very soon forthcoming for Stephen. She joined The London Ambulance Column, which was well under way by that autumn; and presently Puddle herself got a job in one of the Government departments. She and Stephen had taken a small service flat in Victoria, and here they would meet when released from their hours of duty. But Stephen was obsessed by her one idea, which was, willy-nilly, to get out to the front, and many and varied were the plans and discussions that were listened to by the sympathetic Puddle. An ambulance had managed to slip over to Belgium for a while and had done some very fine service. Stephen had hit on a similar idea, but in her case the influence required had been lacking. In vain did she offer to form a Unit at her own expense; the reply was polite but always the same, a monotonous reply: England did not send women to the front line trenches. She disliked the idea of joining the throng who tormented the patient passport officials with demands to be sent out to France at once, on no matter how insufficient a pretext. What was the use of her going to France unless she could find there the work that she wanted? She preferred to stick to her job in England. And now quite often while she waited at the stations for the wounded, she would see unmistakable figures—unmistakable to her they would be at first sight, she would single them out of the crowd as by instinct. For as though gaining courage from the terror that is war, many a one who was even as Stephen, had crept out of her hole and come into the daylight, come into the daylight and faced her country: ‘Well, here I am, will you take me or leave me?’ And England had taken her, asking no questions—she was strong and efficient, she could fill a man’s place, she could organize too, given scope for her talent. England had said: ‘Thank you very much. You’re just what we happen to want . . . at the moment.’ So, side by side with more fortunate women, worked Miss Smith who had been breeding dogs in the country; or Miss Oliphant who had been breeding nothing since birth but a litter of hefty complexes; or Miss Tring who had lived with a very dear friend in the humbler purlieus of Chelsea. One great weakness they all had, it must be admitted, and this was for uniforms—yet why not? The good workman is worthy of his Sam Browne belt. And then too, their nerves were not at all weak, their pulses beat placidly through the worst air raids, for bombs do not trouble the nerves of the invert, but rather that terrible silent bombardment from the batteries of God’s good people.

• From In Search of Paul: How Jesus's Apostle Opposed Rome's Empire with God's Kingdom (2005)

  RESTORATION. Augustus vowed a temple to Mars before the battle of Philippi in 42, and when he finally dedicated it in 2 B.C.E., he gave the war god a powerful new title, Ultor, the “Avenger,” the god who had helped him avenge the murder of his adoptive father, Julius Caesar. But Augustus never portrayed Philippi as an act of revenge to settle a personal score. To avoid a new round of civil wars, he described his fight against his father’s opponents as lawful punishment of wrongdoers. He opened the Acts of the Divine Augustus with this statement: “At the age of nineteen on my own responsibility and at my own expense I raised an army, with which I successfully championed the liberty of the republic when it was oppressed by the tyranny of a faction” (I.I). And again, “I drove into exile the murderers of my father, avenging their crime through tribunals established by law; and afterwards, when they made war on the republic, I twice defeated them in battle” (2). His stated goal was nothing less than the restoration of the Republic. The Acts of the Divine Augustus records the assassins’ punishment in a judicial-political tone, and the sculptural program of the Augustan Forum and the Mars Temple accentuates that with a moral-religious note. Augustus avenged Caesar at Philippi and exemplified the socioreligious virtue of pietas, “piety,” and particularly filial piety, with which he linked himself to Aeneas, who had saved his father from burning Troy. That hero’s filial piety was a set-piece scene on lamps, tombstones, and frescos throughout Italy. Aeneas is usually shown with his aged father, Anchises, on his shoulder and holding his own son, Julus, by the hand. Anchises holds the box containing the family gods (the penates) until, as Virgil’s Aeneid says, “He should build a city and bring his gods to Latium” (1.5–6). A coin minted nearly a century later depicts schematically the configuration of the Temple of Mars Ultor: Augustus is below in the center of the forum in his chariot, atop the pediment to right is Aeneas with father on shoulder, and to left is Romulus with trophy in hand. This iconography made Augustus the heir of Roman history if not the (re) founder of Rome itself. He represents true Romanitas and the imagery in the Augustan Forum and the Mars Temple is a microcosm of the broader Augustan program of restoring pietas and Roman religion. Most temples had become dilapidated and were in disrepair during the late Republic. Their physical condition was seen as a symptom of the neglect of piety and religious ritual, which, in turn, was taken as the root cause of Roman civil war and Republican collapse. In his Odes the poet Horace rebukes the Romans for their apostasy: “Your fathers’ sins, O Roman, you, though guiltless, shall expiate, till you restore the crumbling temples and shrines of the gods and their statues soiled with grimy smoke” (3.6.1–4).

• From In Search of Paul: How Jesus's Apostle Opposed Rome's Empire with God's Kingdom (2005)

  AUGUSTALES. Other groups also sought the emperor’s patronage. The Augustales, a lower-class group of freed slaves, are known to have existed in cities throughout the empire and especially in Roman colonies like Corinth. In that city’s forum, they erected a huge blue marble step with an enormous statue of Augustus, to judge from the large footprints, impression of a spear or staff, and the inscription to the lares Augusti, Augustus’s own ancestral spirits. None of these Corinthian freed slaves could ever have ascended alone to any height on the pyramidal blocks of Corinth’s patronal system. Indeed, each was certainly a client of this or that wealthier and more influential patron. But by banding together as a group, they could collectively purchase such a public monument and thereby demonstrate to city and visitor their devotion to Caesar, hoping, if not for his direct imperial favor, then at least for attention from someone like Spartiaticus. That high visibility along with their semi-exclusive group dynamics would attract many lower-level hangers-on to become potential clients of the Augustales’s third- or fourth-level patrons. MEALS. Both of those preceding inscriptions were situated on the central axis of the forum, where sacrifices were offered on imperial birthdays, anniversaries, and any number of other occasions. Though the sacrifice itself was the central ceremony, the often daylong festivities were recognized holidays with a marketlike atmosphere; games were held, and at some point the sacrificial meat was distributed to Corinth’s citizens. The Discourses of Paul’s older contemporary Dio Chyrsostom give some indication of the character of these imperial festivals. He says they, bring together a huge throng of people, litigants, jurors, orators, governors, attendants, slaves, pimps, muleteers, tinkers, prostitutes and craftsmen. Consequently those who have goods to sell get the highest price and there is no lack of work in the city, whether for the transport, or houses or women. (35.15) We can well imagine the hustle and bustle of Corinth’s forum packed with citizens and slaves, local residents and foreign visitors during the various imperial feast days. Processions of priests and officials marched through the city and wound toward the forum’s altars, where, with accompanying pomp, prayer, and libation, beast after beast was slaughtered. The meat was then distributed by key priests like Spartiaticus first to honored guests and the city’s leading citizens, who in turn took it to their neighborhoods or homes to pass it on to their clients. These in turn, would preside over a banquet with their families, clients, and slaves. Many others would have barbecued right there in the forum and ate the meat as part of a public meal. The entire ceremony, of course, took place under the watchful eyes of the imperial family, whose statues stood in the forum and its surrounding temples. Reclining at the Asclepeion

• From In Search of Paul: How Jesus's Apostle Opposed Rome's Empire with God's Kingdom (2005)

  EpilogueThe Lure of a Global EmpireAlbert Beveridge (R-Indiana): “The Philippines are ours forever, and just beyond the Philippines are China’s illimitable markets. We will not retreat from either…. We will not renounce our part in the mission of our race, trustees under God, of the civilization of the world…. God has marked us as his chosen people, henceforth to lead in the regeneration of the world…. He has made us adept in government that we administer government among savage and senile peoples.” George Hoar (R-Massachusetts): “I have listened, delighted, as have, I suppose, all the members of the Senate, to the eloquence of my honorable friend from Indiana…. Yet, Mr. President, as I heard his eloquent description of wealth and commerce and trade, I listened in vain for those words which the American people have been wont to take upon their lips in every crisis…. The words Right, Justice, Duty, Freedom were absent, my friend must permit me to say, from that eloquent speech.” —Debate in the U.S. Senate (February 1899) To Romans the glory of their empire was even greater than that which Pericles could claim for Athens, because they had come to think that it properly embraced the whole world. Moreover, their dominion was ordained by the gods, whose favor Rome had deserved by piety and justice, and it was exercised in the interests of the subjects…. The Athenians too had liked to see themselves as protectors of peoples unjustly threatened or oppressed, and as benefactors of their subjects; it seems very doubtful if many of them acknowledged publicly or in their own hearts that their empire was a tyranny and unjustly acquired. What was most novel in the Roman attitude to their empire was the belief that it was universal and willed by the gods. —Peter A. Brunt, in P. Garnsey and C. Whittaker, eds., Imperialism in the Ancient World (1978) First Victory, Then Peace In Pamplona, Spain, it’s the running of the bulls. In Ankara, Turkey, it’s the running of the taksis. Especially at rush hour. Not jay-walking but jay-running, as people take their lives in hand and sprint across, say, Independence Avenue among cars, buses, and yellow Fiat taxis roaring to, from, and around the huge mounted statue of the great statesman Atatürk in Ulus Square. For young males it is an art form: do not look left or right, do not hesitate front or back, and do not move faster than necessary to make that sidewalk one second ahead of death. The taksi for bull, the briefcase for veronica.

• From A History of Christianity (1976)

  In the great Roman cities, the Jewish communities gave an impression of wealth, increasing power, self-confidence and success. Within the Roman system, they were exceptionally privileged. Many of the diaspora Jews were already Roman citizens, and all Jews, since the days of Julius Caesar, who greatly admired them, enjoyed rights of association. This meant they could meet to hold religious services, community dinners and feasts, and for every kind of social and charitable purpose. The Romans recognized the strength of Jewish religious feelings by, in effect, exempting them from observance of the state religion. In place of emperor-worship, the Jews were allowed to show their respect for the state by offering sacrifices on the emperor’s behalf. This was a unique concession. The wonder is that it was not more resented. But the diaspora Jews were, on the whole, admired and imitated, rather than envied. They were not in the least self-effacing. They could, when they chose, play a leading role in municipal politics, especially in Egypt, where they were perhaps over a million strong. Some had notable careers in the imperial service. Among these there were passionate admirers of the Roman system, like the historian Josephus, or the philosopher Philo. While the Jews of Judea, and still more so of semi-Jewish areas like Galilee, tended to be poor, backward, obscurantist, narrow-minded, fundamentalist, uncultured and xenophobic, the diaspora Jews were expansive, rich, cosmopolitan, well-adjusted to Roman norms and to Hellenic culture, Greek-speaking, literate and open to ideas. They were also, in notable contrast to the Palestine Jews, anxious to spread their religion. In general, diaspora Jews were proselytizers, often passionately so. Throughout this period some Jews at least had universalist aims, and hoped that Israel would be ‘the light of the gentiles’. The Greek adaptation of the Old Testament, or Septuagint, which was composed in Alexandria and was widely used in diaspora communities, has an expansionist and missionary flavour quite alien to the original. And there were in all probability catechisms and manuals for aspiring converts, reflecting the liberal-mindedness and large-heartedness of the diaspora Jew to the gentile. Philo, too, projected in his philosophy the concept of a gentile mission and wrote joyfully: ‘There is not a single Greek or barbarian city, not a single people, to which the custom of Sabbath observance has not spread, or in which the feast days, the kindling of the lights, and many of our prohibitions about food are not heeded.’ This claim was generally true. Though it is impossible to present accurate figures, it is clear that by the time of Christ the diaspora Jews greatly outnumbered the settled Jews of Palestine: perhaps by as many as 4.5 million to 1 million. Those attached in some way to the Jewish faith formed a significant proportion of the total population of the empire and in Egypt, where they were most strongly entrenched, one in every seven or eight inhabitants was a Jew. A large proportion of these people were not Jewish by race.

• From A History of Christianity (1976)

  Gregory VII brought the issue right out into the open by flatly denying the emperor’s power to appoint or invest bishops, however important their temporal possessions might be to the running of the empire. He dismissed the idea of the emperor as a priest-king. There was, he insisted, an ancient and absolute distinction between clerics and lay people. And he denied the right of ‘emperors, kings and other lay persons, whether men or women’ to presume ‘contrary to the statutes of the holy fathers’ to appoint to bishoprics and abbacies. Such actions were void, and the perpetrators excommunicate. The papal policy made the traditional empire unworkable. If the emperor could not dispose of bishoprics and abbacies, and their resources, in the pursuit of administrative order, authority would in practice fall into the hands of the imperial princes, and the realm would dissolve. Gregory was unmoved by this argument; or rather, he accepted the consequence and drew some radical conclusions from it. The State without the Church was nothing. Just as the spirit animated the body, so the Church ultimately determined the motions of the State. Indeed, the State, in carrying out its temporary functions, was merely exercising the authority delegated to it by the Church. Having dismissed the idea of a pontifical king he replaced it by the regal pontiff, thus turning the old imperial theory of government upside down. He looked right back into the past for inspiration. Above all he turned to the era of Constantine. It is fascinating to observe how, during the Gregorian reform period, pictorial comments on the Donation of Constantine appear in Italian mosaics and wall-decorations carried out under papal orders or inspiration. Some of these frescoes have disappeared, but we know them from sixteenth-century drawings. Thus the Secret Council Chamber of the Lateran Palace – the very room where Charlemagne once sat in judgment over a wily but frightened Leo III – was now covered with paintings of various popes, Gregory included, shown seated in triumph, with their feet resting on the prostrate bodies of their vanquished secular enemies. As a matter of fact, Gregory was not entirely happy with the Donation : it was presented as the gift of Constantine, and therefore was capable of an imperialist interpretation. In his view, the primacy, and all that followed from it, came from Christ himself. Some time in the late 1070s, he caused to be inserted in his letter-book a statement of papal claims which he seems to have dictated to his secretary. It amounted to a theory of papal world-government. It is significant that it began with a statement that the Pope could be judged by no one. He was, in fact, the only truly free man because, while his own jurisdiction was universal and unqualified, the only court in which he was obliged to sue was that of Heaven. From this proposition world theocracy inevitably followed. The Roman Church, continued Gregory, has never erred and never can err.

• From Available: The unfiltered and empowering new memoir for women about sex, dating and divorce after 40 (2021)

  Those things are true about me, I’m not purporting to be someone I’m not. This may be a superficial and one-sided presentation of myself, but it’s not false advertising. I’m showing my teeth – white enough and straight enough; I’m showing my body – petite, strong and healthy; I’m showing my nails – manicured and brightly colored. In other words, there shouldn’t be any surprises when a man meets me in person, nothing that I’m squirreling away and hoping he won’t notice when I’m alive in front of him. And if Michael does see my profile then it means he’s on Tinder too. I do the thing that I’ve been doing over and over again for the past few months: I take a leap of faith. I click the button to make my profile public for anyone on Tinder to see. A few hours later, lying in bed with Georgia pressing her warm feet against me as she sleeps, I stare at my phone and wonder how I survived the monotony of my life pre-Tinder. Tinder contains a vast sea of men, so many of them with such odd profile pictures that when I find the occasional one that doesn’t reek of inappropriateness, I click the heart button just to show solidarity, like hey, my normal sees your normal and thinks we might be able to make some normal magic together. It doesn’t matter if I find the person attractive, I just care that he seems like a person I could know in my current life. If it looks like a mug shot, swipe left – if you can’t smile for this one picture, I worry. Sitting in your car with your seatbelt on, swipe left – come on, live a little! There have to be more creative backdrops for a selfie. Lying in bed shirtless, swipe left, don’t be so obvious. Oh, even better, take a pic of yourself in front of a mirror with nothing but briefs on, swipe, swipe, swipe! All of your photos are ones in which you’re posing with other women, swipe left – that raises suspicion, are you hinting at an open marriage? You’re posing with your kids, swipe left – don’t drag your kids into this sordid place. You’re posing with your dog in every photo, swipe left – I’ve been down this road, I see your dog for the jealous lover she really is. You never part your lips when you smile, swipe left, what are you hiding? An overgrowth of facial hair, body completely covered in tattoos, you’re holding a gun, you only show one photo of yourself and ten of sunsets, you’re dressed up in an elaborate costume, you show your body but never your head, your head but never your body, you say you’re forty but look like a teenager, you say you’re forty but look like a grandpa?

• From A History of Christianity (1976)

  Peter, however, was the more valuable founder, as he was in some sense the chief apostle, Jesus’s closest associate, and the beneficiary of the famous ‘rock and keys’ text in Matthew. There is no evidence that Rome exploited this text to assert its primacy before about 250 – and then, interestingly enough, in conflict with the aggressive episcopalian Cyprian – but what is clear is that in the second half of the second century, and no doubt in response to Marcion’s Pauline heresy – the first heresy Rome itself had experienced – Paul was eliminated from any connection with the Rome episcopate and the office was firmly attached to Peter alone. In fact the first Roman bishop in any meaningful sense was probably Soter, 166–74, but by that time the concept of an episcopal tradition going back to Jesus had already been established, and Rome may also have been behind the process which made ‘her’ apostle, Peter, the founder of the Church of Antioch, and his assistant, Mark, the founder in Alexandria, thus turning into Roman ecclesiastical colonies the second and third cities in the empire. Even before this stage, however, there is evidence that Rome was using its position as the imperial capital to influence the Church in other centres, and thus to build up a case-history of successful intervention. The first such instance of which we have record is Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians, where Clement weighs in on the side of established order. There were other second-century cases, usually on what seemed like marginal issues: cultic practices, the date of Easter, and so forth. Rome was appealed to as the best apostolic authority, and responded eagerly. It had an early reputation for robustness in the faith: it was the first Church to undergo a systematic state persecution and to survive it triumphantly. It was also orthodox: that is, it was felt to have preserved intact the teaching of Peter and Paul. The danger-zone of heresy, of gnosticism, of credal instability and osmosis was the east, especially Syria, Asia Minor and Egypt. Rome was far removed from the infection. It seems to have excluded gnostic tendencies right from the start. It set the pace in defining the canon, eliminating the spurious and producing authorized texts. It had no experience of heresy until Marcion, and then it quickly forced him to operate in Asia; equally, it defeated the Montanist challenge – Montanism flourished in Asia long after it had been eliminated from Rome’s Christian circles. The great antiheretical campaigners, Hegesippus, Justin Rhodo, Militiades, were Rome-oriented, most of them living and working there. Rome profited not only from its apostolic foundation but from its associations as the capital of the empire: it was the standard for faith, ritual, organization, textual accuracy and general Christian practice. It was the first Christian Church to eliminate minority tendencies, and present a homogenous front to the world.

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

  The papal cause seemed to be hopelessly lost, but the spirit of Julius rose with the defeat. He is reported to have exclaimed, "I will stake 100,000 ducats and my crown that I will drive the French out of Italy," and the victory of Ravenna proved to be another Cannae. The hardy Swiss, whose numbers Cardinal Schinner had increased to 18,000, and the Venetians pushed the campaign, and the barbarians, as Julius called the French, were forced to give up what they had gained, to surrender Milan and gradually to retire across the Alps. Parma and Piacenza, by virtue of the grant of Mathilda, passed into his hands, as did also Reggio. The victory was celebrated in Rome on an elaborate scale. Cannons boomed from S. Angelo, and thanks were given in all the churches. In recognition of their services, the pope gave to the Swiss two large banners and the permanent title of Protectors of the Apostolic see—auxiliatores sedis apostolicae. Such was the end of this remarkable campaign. Julius purchased Siena from the emperor for 30,000 ducats and, with the aid of the seasoned Spanish troops, took Florence and restored the Medici to power. In December, 1513, Maximilian, who at one time conceived the monstrous idea of combining with his imperial dignity the office of supreme pontiff, announced his support of the Lateran council, the pope having agreed to use all the spiritual measures within his reach to secure the complete abasement of Venice. The further execution of the plans was prevented by the pope’s death. In his last hours, in a conversation with Cardinal Grimani, he pounded on the floor with his cane, exclaiming, "If God gives me life, I will also deliver the Neapolitans from the yoke of the Spaniards and rid the land of them."835 The Pisan council had opened Sept. 1, 1511, with only two archbishops and 14 bishops present. First and last 6 cardinals attended, Carvajal, Briçonnet, Prie, d’Albret, Sanseverino and Borgia. The Universities of Paris Toulouse and Poictiers were represented by doctors. After holding three sessions, it moved to Milan, where the victory of Ravenna gave it a short breath of life. When the French were defeated, it again moved to Asti in Piedmont, where it held a ninth session, and then it adjourned to Lyons, where it dissolved of itself.836 Hergenröther, Pastor and other Catholic historians take playful delight in calling the council the little council—conciliabulum—and a conventicle, terms which Julius applied to it in his bulls.837 Among its acts were a fulmination against the synod Julius was holding in the Lateran, and it had the temerity to cite the pope to appear, and even to declare him deposed from all spiritual and temporal authority. The synod also reaffirmed the decrees of the 5th session of the Council of Constance, placing general councils over the pope.