The Rise and Fall of Colleen Applegate

As Mr. McClarey puts it, “a pro-Playboy troll comes to Open Book.” A commentor at Amy Welborn’s blog sings praises of the Playboy track to stardom. He cites Pamela Anderson, Jenny McCarthy, and Tara Patrick (Carmen Electra) as examples.

My reply follows…

Oh, it’s a little bit of centerfold gamesmanship, is it?

Well, I’ll call your Pamela Anderson, and raise you a Colleen Applegate.

What? You’ve never heard of her? Oh, that’s probably because she’s dead. Although she gathered more fame as a dead porn star, she’s largely forgotten now. The young 20-year-old girl came from Nowhere, Minnesota and struck out for Hollywood, California for her 15 minutes of fame. People Weekly describes her first steps to stardom:

A few weeks after leaving, Colleen called with an odd piece of good news: She was working as a model and earning $100 a day, more than her father was making. She didn’t mention that she’d answered a newspaper ad for the World Modeling Agency in Van Nuys and had begun posing nude for magazine photographers.

PBS is more antiseptic, they can’t be bothered to reveal her name:

She was from Minnesota. Young, pretty, and fresh. She went to Hollywood in search of a dream and found herself in X-rated movies, on drugs, and estranged from her family and friends.

Yeah, she made it to the “top.” One week she’s clinking champagne glasses with Francis Ford Coppola at the Erotic Film Awards, and the next week, well… “Two years to the month after she left Farmington, Colleen Applegate came home to be buried.”

Such are the wages of the culture of death.

Posted in Miscellanea | 3 Comments

Visions of the Wasteland

What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow
Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man,
You cannot say, or guess, for you know only
A heap of broken images, where the sun beats,
And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water. Only
There is shadow under this red rock,
(Come in under the shadow of this red rock),
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.

     Frisch weht der Wind
     Der Heimat zu.
     Mein Irisch Kind,
     Wo weilest du?
‘You gave me hyacinths first a year ago;
‘They called me the hyacinth girl.’
–Yet when we came back, late, from the Hyacinth garden,
Your arms full, and your hair wet, I could not
Speak, and my eyes failed, I was neither
Living nor dead, and I knew nothing,
Looking into the heart of light, the silence.

Od’ und leer das Meer.

Thus, I began a new direction on this blog, decrying the weakness of modern conservatism. Formerly this blog was called Voice in the Wilderness, but I felt the title was unoriginal and I did not have the courage to claim that I was following in the footsteps of John the Baptist. So I softened it to Whispers in the Wasteland, searched for an appropriate biblical quote — there are a few places where whispers and wastelands are mentioned — but none seemed appropriate.

The title of the website is a play on the etymology of the word hermit. Indeed, also valid for this site is Eremite’s Wilderness or eremites wilderness which would mean desert wilderness when the Greek word is translated. Additionally, there are some interesting personal connections. My mother grew up in a village Saint Antoine, more properly, the parish of Saint Antoine L’Ermite, named after Saint Anthony the hermit of the Egyptian desert. Saint Anthony is considered to be the founder of Christian monasticism. My father grew up in a nearby village Notre Dame (Our Lady). My parents married in my mother’s parish and my birthday is the feast day of Our Lady of Lourdes (however, my actual day of birth was on a Sunday). The healing waters of Lourdes and the desert are quite a contrast and yet, naturally, I’ve come to think of the Church as an oasis in the wasteland.

So when Pope Benedict XVI spoke of deserts and water during the homily of his installation Mass, I knew I had found a match, an appropriate signature quote for the blog (n.b. Saint Benedict is the founder of western monasticism):

Continue reading

Posted in Religion | 1 Comment

A Coincidence

A personal note: I visited Blessed John XXIII seminary today. I met Father Peter Uglietto (the next rector for Pope John), who remarked to the effect that it was an interesting coincidence that when we scheduled the appointment several weeks ago, we had no idea that it would fall on the day of the pope’s funeral.
Indeed.

Summoning all the sagacity and acumen I could muster at the moment, I replied, “Uh huh.”
;-)

Posted in Miscellanea | 2 Comments

Prayers for the Pope

During the homily during this morning’s Mass, the priest noted the pope’s constant call for solidarity through prayer. In this time, the world is united in prayer for JPII. May it be done as the Father wills; let it be known that the world stands by the pope in prayer.

After Mass, one of the parishioners (whom I didn’t recognize as a daily communicant) came into the sacristy to thank father for the wonderful homily (he is on a roll, yesterday’s homily was great as well). As the man turned to leave, he called to his son (around 4 years old), “Come, John Paul.” :-) Father mentioned the many baptisms he has done for boys carrying that name.

May his journey be a peaceful one, and when he meets his Risen Lord may he receive praise for a job well done.

Posted in Religion | Comments Off

On to Golgotha

Talk is cheap.

To those subject to the totalitarian communist regimes, Pope John Paul II said, “You are not who they say you are.” To the “enlightened” West, the supposed free countries of the world, Pope John Paul’s strongest words were never spoken. To the post-Christian secular world, which not quite demanded, but strongly urged that the frail and ailing pontiff step down, Pope John Paul spoke for the helpless, the ailing, the weak, “We are not who you say we are.” A man’s worth is not measured by his utility. His last years will be called heroic — he kept to his mission until the very last — but let us not forget this great lesson. In the dark shadow of the tragedy of Terri Schiavo’s end, this pope has given testimony by his very actions that it’s not about the “quality of life,” it’s about the “value of life.”

Today, AP put the following on the wire:

Navarro-Valls said John Paul asked aides to read him the biblical passage describing the final stage of the Way of the Cross, the path that Christ took to his Crucifixion. In that stage, according to the Bible, Christ’s body was taken down from the cross, wrapped in a linen shroud and placed in his tomb.

Navarro-Valls said the pope followed attentively and made the sign of the cross.

“This is surely an image I have never seen in these 26 years,” Navarro-Valls said. Choking up, he walked out of the room.

The pope from Galilee is now the pope at Golgotha.

From John 21:

17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” (Jesus) said to him, “Feed my sheep.
18 Amen, amen, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to dress yourself and go where you wanted; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.”
19 He said this signifying by what kind of death he would glorify God. And when he had said this, he said to him, “Follow me.”

Posted in Religion | Comments Off

Little Epiphanies of the Rosary

I wonder if this happens to other folks. It doesn’t happen all the time, but it happens enough for me to take notice. Sometimes, when I pray/meditate the Rosary, I get sudden flashes of insight.

Now perhaps there’s a psychological explanation for all this; or maybe a spiritual one. I want to be clear that I make no claims as to the source of the inspirations. It could be my genius showing through (hee hee, yeah, right), or maybe a deposit of the Holy Spirit (oh sweet vanity), or might just mean I’m due for a nice padded room with a warm straitjacket.

I’ve forgotten most of them, and I’m sure I’ve had a few repeats, although I’ve been just as tickled as if each time were the first.

A few months ago, I told someone that I’ve a long commute to and from work (an hour each way). She suggested that I pray the Rosary while driving. I really wasn’t warm to the idea, since it seemed to be a distraction. But a little thought reminded me that it’s the day dreaming that would be distracted (yep, I largely drive on automatic, except when the traffic is bad, at which point an hour commute becomes extremely tiring). And a little desperation creeped in. As I’ve already admitted in the previous post, I had bitten off a little more than I could chew. I needed to make up time. So I began, hesitantly, to pray while driving. But after about a week, it became second nature. As time progressed, I found it easier to meditate on the mysteries while driving. I was pretty impressed with the amount of tasks I could accomplish at once: pray, meditate, drive, check the rear view, change lanes, think about the grocery list and solve a problem at work. Multitasking computers?! Pfft!

Today while driving, and meditating on the mystery of the wedding at Cana, it came to me that the transformation of water into wine, the miracle of the loaves and all those other miracles, impressive though they may be, aren’t as impressive as Jesus’s transformation of souls, the liberation from the slavery of sin. Of course, the thought was immediately followed by “Hey the mystery of the institution of the Eucharist is coming up.” And yes, the transformation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord, is pretty impressive, but somehow to me, it seems that this last is really in a class of its own.

Other little epiphany of the Rosary is a nugget of evidence that St. Luke interviewed the Blessed Virgin Mary for his Gospel. The late Father Raymond Brown seemed to have thought that Luke made up the Magnificat by borrowing from the Old Testament. It’s another reason why I immediately viewed the work of Father Brown with suspicion. I’d like to explore and develop this idea of St. Luke’s interview of Mary someday. Maybe, I’ll take on Father Brown.

Well, these are the sorts of things that just pop into my mind.

And then there’s the little epiphany of the Rosary which is the reason why I dared to publish this post. It has to do with The Passion of the Christ, there is one scene which came to convince me that Mel Gibson understood. He gets It. It’s the scene the Blessed Virgin and Mary Magdalene are mopping up the Blood of Jesus after the scourging at the pillar. Mary Magdalene has the flashback as the woman that the Pharisees caught in adultery (Gibson apparently took some artistic license playing off of the legend of Magdalene as prostitute). It is there, that I saw that Mel understood.

But the explanation of Mel’s interpretation of John 8 will have to wait. It will appear in another post. Soon. I promise.

Posted in Religion | Comments Off

What I did during Lent

Well, I was supposed to keep blogging during this past Lent, but I seem to have this failing “of biting off more than I can chew.” I got more not done, than items accomplished. Let’s just say things did not go according to my plans. It was a great success. So in the grand tradition of essays assigned to high school students returning from summer vacation, I shall attempt to explain what I did during Lent.

I spent some time attending Bible study. That is, I attended until a priest tried to explain, contrary to the reports in the synoptic Gospels, that Jesus didn’t actually make any statement about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit as determined by the leading biblical scholars of our times. I complained. It was tense, but it remained civil (he did apologize). It was during this time that I became acquainted with the late Father Raymond Brown. I’m not a fan of his, to put it kindly, and perhaps I will someday post an essay describing the limitations of biblical scholarship and its ability to inform the faith.

I joined Birthright. I’m told that I’m the first male to join the local chapter. It’s really too early to for me to make any comments other than: it’s a David against the Planned Parenthood Goliath. Here’s to hope that the stories turn out the same.

I read quite a few books: two by Chesterton (The Man Who Was Thursday and The Napoleon of Notting Hill), one by Dave Armstrong (A Biblical Defense of Catholicism), one by Pope John Paul II (Gift and Mystery), and one by Bishop Fulton Sheen (Lift Up Your Hearts). It’s been quite a while since I’ve read at that pace.

I made a point of attending daily Mass during Lent. Because one of the altar servers was having hip problems (and the flu), I found myself volunteering to fill in. As a 43 year-old, I substantially lowered the age of altar servers in the daily Mass rotation (hint: I’m a young rookie). While I was doing that, an intelligent coordinator of the lector schedule decided to strike while I was in a volunteering mood. I found myself pulling a few extra readings for Mass (and including a reading during the Triduum, when I also got my feet washed).

And it snowed. A lot. Well too much for me at least. It was during the battle over biblical scholarship that as I was walking to church on Sunday for Eucharistic adoration during an exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, I noted two snowflakes swirling down together from gray skies. It was a lone pair dancing in the wind. And with a gust of wind, one of the snowflakes landed on the tip of my nose. I snickered. God has a sense of humor. An hour later, as I was walking back, the flurries had increased, with the snow coming down in great spirals. I felt like a kid. I loved it.

And during this Lenten season, I largely turned off the distractions of television and the Internet. I fasted. My prayers increased. I found an increased devotion to the Blessed Virgin through the Rosary, and in parallel, I found an increased attachment to her Son. I was motivated by the colorful preaching of Father Corapi (about 25 hours worth of DVD, and another 40 to go).

And Easter finally came. I rejoiced. I attended the early morning Mass with my parents, and after Mass I returned to my parents’ house where I enjoyed pancakes with homemade maple syrup, made from the two maple trees in the front yard. My sister and her family came later for Easter dinner.

Late that afternoon, after I returned to my apartment, before a much needed nap, I thought, “Now, what?” In what might seem to be paradox, while still feeling the joy of Easter, I felt a tinge of regret that Lent was over. That’s my measure of success.

Peace be with you.

Posted in Miscellanea | 1 Comment

Free Speech and Freedom

I’m not a free speech absolutist. I don’t believe that every form of censorship is necessarily wrong. It’s reasonable position on the conservative side. For example (please forgive me), Jonah Goldberg has beat up on free speech absolutists several times at NRO (I’ve borrowed that term from him). I don’t see a problem with the banning of flag burning or with the banning of nudie bars. I do see the problem with the restrictions placed on free speech with the enactment of campaign finance laws.

The truth is, just about everyone believes in some form of censorship. At least libertarians are willing to admit that shouting “fire” in a crowded theater is forbidden, unless there actually happens to be a fire.

For the left, censorship usually takes the form of political correctness. They go the bullying route. Recently, I encountered a lefty that was so willing to throw out the ‘homophobe’ mantra, that the disclaimer “hate the sin, love the sinner” was insufficient to protect anyone from her fangs. Any peep against sodomy was proof of a person’s hatred of homosexuals. I’m only exaggerating slightly.

On the right, at least in some corners, there is the idea of ordered liberty. The idea is that for freedom to flourish, some order must be established. Bromides such as “the best answer to poor speech is more speech” fail to bear up to reality.

The failure of the libertarian dystopia, otherwise known as the Internet forum, was well expressed by my friend Rafa, in the following rant:

In the Internet everyone can play tough, every one can be a hero, everyone can be a killer. This amusing exchange that I just described came after a couple of weeks of some other idiot from New York doing the same thing to most members of that forum, he invited them to come on over to his apartment and to see what a great Conan The Barbarian he was. He insulted everyone, everyone’s wife, mother and grandmother and he is still relentless about this attitude with one particular member there.

Rafa then expressed relief at returning to a better moderated (and closed) forum.

Welcome to the jungle.

There is a difference between the censorship styles of right and left. While some may disagree, the right thinks that flag burning and stripping in a nudie bar are not protected speech, and the left is willing to put restrictions on political speech (à la campaign finance bills). In general, these issues aptly express the divide between left and right. Flag burning (anger) and nudie bars (lust) are expressions of the gut. The political campaign might be emotional, but it is the instance where actual speech is used; reason can reside here.

The leftist view of free speech promotes feelings and drives out thought. Any nut can rant and rave, and his feelings should be respected. After all, he has a “right to free speech.” We are expected to show compassion toward designated victim groups. Any failure to respond appropriately is deemed to be hateful. This is the tactic voiced recently by liberals such as Ted Kennedy; he “reasons” that the denial of same-sex marriage rights is of the same order of bigotry that placed blacks at the back of the bus. Reason cannot be inserted in such a “discussion.”

Bad speech drives out good speech. When an emotional argument is given the same validity as a reasoned argument, we’ve given the keys of the asylum to the lunatics. This is not to say that the heart should never be given voice, but the crying woman will demand vengeance and the angry man will beat his chest. Both are bullies. The more sane folks, unless they have tremendous patience and strength, are likely to flee or remain quiet.

Leftists do have valid criticisms of traditional censorship. They will draw on the tried and true (and worn out) examples of excess. But that doesn’t prove that censorship is always wrong. Indeed, Tammy Bruce’s criticism of the left (in The New Thought Police: Inside the Left’s Assault on Free Speech and Free Minds) shows that they are very willing to resort to censorship as long as it’s on their terms. Often, their terms have a Stalinist tinge.

The sign that traditional censorship is working is when it promotes free thought within its established boundaries. One might argue that the boundaries are improperly set, but that doesn’t mean it’s wrong to have boundaries.

Welcome to the city.

Posted in Politics | Comments Off

Lent 2005

Last year, Lent was an extraordinary success for me. I set some goals for myself in order to conform myself to God. The results weren’t exactly what I expected, but I’m happy nonetheless. I know that might have come out a bit awkward, but that’s what is coming up this year.

The three goals this year, in order of priority 1) accomplish specific tasks toward a possible vocation. 2) An aggressive study program to increase the knowledge of my faith and 3) to blog.

The third one is a bit of a curiosity, since we’ve seen a few bloggers give up blogging for Lent. But if you look at the history of this blog, an announcement that I’ve given up blogging for Lent would appear silly.
The truth is I’ve imposed a very high standard of fact checking upon myself, such that on several topics, I’ve decided I’ve no idea what I’m talking about, and I’ve shelved the topic.

Well, part of my Lenten sacrifice this year is to give up TV and the Internet with three exceptions 1) e-mail 2) Internet use required for work and 3) this blog.

That will severely limit my ability to fact check or come up with that cool Chesterton quote. In this case, this is what I want, to get back in the habit of writing and posting again. It also serves as a warning; you’re getting what popped out of the ol’ noggin (which is right nine times out of ten :-) ).

I may not blog every day (and blogging might have to be bumped to satisfy priorities one and two), but I think I’ll be able to fit some time in for the weekend. I’ll be seeing you.

Posted in Miscellanea | Comments Off

Henry Tandey’s Regret

Mark Shea is repulsed by Michael Ledeen’s excerpt at NRO. While I agree with Mark that Ledeen’s comments go against the Magisterium, it seems we disagree on approach. The following will probably not last long in his comment box, so I reproduce it here[*].

Murder is surely evil, yet every reasonable person will agree that the cause of good would have been greatly advanced if Henry Tandey had killed Hitler in that trench. History abounds with examples of good actions furthering the cause of evil…

I must be an unreasonable person (I wonder if Mr. Shea agrees), since I disagree with the emphasized phrase. While we know with certainty the single time line in which Hitler lived to 1940, we cannot know how alternate time lines might turn out. And why should Henry Tandey feel responsible for the time line up to 1940 or even 1945? Aren’t the dates arbitrarily chosen according to our perspective of significant moments of history? Supposing that Tandey got his wish, shouldn’t the calculus include the 50 billion killed in A.D. 2525, when a descendant of one who would have been killed in Hitler’s Holocaust sets off a nuclear device in the city of New New York at Tau Ceti? How can we know with any moral certainty which time line is the preferred time line? What is the moral calculus?

More than twenty years intervened between Henry Tandey’s chance and his later regret. There must have been many opportunities to deter Hitler from his evil course. Perhaps if Eva Braun had married Hitler. Maybe if Goebbels had a twinge of conscience. Who knows?

The closer analogy is nothing that’s been mentioned so far. I bet that it would horrify Michael Ledeen if he were asked to defend it. Paul Hill didn’t have to wait twenty years to test his moral calculations. It would be a matter of days before the abortionist, Dr. John Britton, would grind up a few more babies in the abortion mill. Paul Hill decided to save future lives by killing Dr. Britton. Perhaps Ledeen might decide that abortion is not murder, but he would have no argument against those who believed abortion is murder. Where would Ledeen’s calculus take us then?

[*] Update: Not without good reason, but Mark has since forgiven me.

Posted in Philosophy | Comments Off