Previous William Thomas Sherman Info Page postings, quotes, observations, etc.
Shun not, man, a spiritual hymn, nor be ill-disposed to listen to it. Death belongs not to it; a story of salvation is our
song. Already I seem to taste better enjoyments, as I discourse on such subjects as these; and especially when there is
before me such a flowering meadow, that is to say, our assembly of those who unite in singing and hearing the divine
mysteries. Wherefore I dare to ask you to listen to me with ears free from all envy, without imitating the jealousy of
Cain [Genesis 4:5], or persecuting your brother like Esau [Genesis 27:41], or approving the brethren of Joseph [Genesis 37:4],
because they hated their brother on account of his words; but differing far from all these, insomuch that each of you is
used to speak the mind of his neighbour. And, on this account, there is no evil jealousy among you, as you have undertaken
to supply your brother's deficiencies. O noble audience, and venerable company, and spiritual food! That I may ever have a
right to share in such pleasures, be this my prayer!
~ Methodius (260-312 A.D.) "Concerning Free Will."
This specific point aside, after reading Methodius, who although reputedly and highly praised by both both ancients and moderns (says the 19th century editor), I find him to be rather a babbler, and as such am personally suspicious that if he wasn’t actually a fraud he may have been someone under the influence. It is odd, for instance how for several chapters he argues against Origin's view that the form of the deceased person's body is what is resurrected; urging instead that somehow the material portions of a corpse are what must be necessarily resurrected as well -- a technical distinction that has hitherto and undoubtedly been overlooked and lost on most of us. Elsewhere in the same work, and no less interesting a thought, he contends that God invented death in order to destroy sin (Discourse on the Resurrection, part III, II, II.; Roberts and Donaldson, vol. 6, p. 372)
Granted this is only my at present impression, but worth, I think, at least mentioning. Also, it is well to bear in mind in such instances of alleged or doubtful authenticity the possibility, notwithstanding how unlikley or remote, that the original person may have been sincere, (more or less) clear headed, and legitimate, but that another subsequently impersonated him; so that what we are led to believe is such and such person is, as it turns out and taken altogether, someone else.
An interview with Jim Morrison's father and sister -- most edifying. I'm surprised at how mild mannered his father, upon my finding out, turned out to be; quite different from what many of us supposed or expected.
["The Doors- Rare Interview With Jim's Family"]
In the "My, how times have changed" department...
Check out this lot up for sale of autographed photos of entertainers from the forties on ebay at:
(Note. The plug-in you will be prompted for simply plays some music.)
It is interesting in particular in viewing such vintage photo-portrait collections to see what people valued, and what they saw success and felicity as being or consisting of, and how or whether we now are really any different or so different as we might assume.
One of the difficulties in attempting to assess and understand the leadership among criminal spirit people is identifying quite who they are and or how many layers or levels of command must or need one go through or get to for purposes of ascertaining and ascribing responsibility. Is there, for example, a monolithic "Satan" who potentially has a hands-on involvement in all serious wrong doing that goes on? Or is he merely a formal figurehead who delegates or grants authorization to others? Is he the same one who occupied that position, say, a hundred or a thousand years ago? Or is it now a different individual than then?
One method that helps in considering such questions is to detect and identify certain kinds of personality traits, and to see when and where such might be seen as repeated. For example, might we describe such a leader as motivated by self-pity? Envy? Childishness? Is he a manly person? Or really a big, spoiled baby? Does he perhaps feel remorse deep down, but then absolves himself of fault while then blaming others instead (this due to his exorbitant egotism?) Do such traits as he possesses show up in his followers? It is interesting, and as I have observed previously, how he would have others act, believe, and behave like himself; how, for all this evil and vile crimes, he would persuade others that his cause is at bottom just, and that he does manifest concern about public opinion or what other people think. The stories of brotherly betrayal -- in Cain and Abel, in Romulus and Remus, in Jacob and Esau for instance -- seem to be good illustrations of his need to sign others on board to his way of thinking, and hence, that he does harbor some fear that if others reject and disagree with him he will in some way be made to feel disappointment.
We might define God as who or what is most sacred, and what is most sacred is God. To say then, as "Satan" presumably does, that there is no God or else that He doesn't really matter is then to say in effect no one or nothing is sacred as such. Why and who would adopt such a view? A person who rejects any other love and devotion except that which is directed toward himself? Or else, as a corollary, if others won't love him most highly (and to his satisfaction) then no one should be so loved?
Approaches like this, I would submit and suggest, will aid us in beginning arrive at a more concrete and accurate portrait of such a person or such persons.
Literature (properly speaking) and serious writing are meant and intended for friends, and for those morally capable of being friends; there being little reason anyone else would or should be interested in it otherwise except perhaps as a form of ephermeral amusement and or a record to assist historians and anthropologists. Further, according to this view, literature requires and implies a better than usual degree of and sensitivity to moral character, just like real friendship itself, and without this higher sense of loyalty, devotion, empathy, and sympathy there is no "literature" as such; only, and at best, bare records and data.
I finally got around to doing that which I've wanted to do for some time; namely, record LPs and transfer them to MP3 files myself (previously I had to ask someone else to do this for me.) My first offering here in this line is the "Collectors' Library of 10 Great Shakespeare Plays" put out by Murray Hill records back in the 70's. As well as being being superb productions with no less than stellar acting, these abridged versions of some of Shakespeare's more famous plays are unsurpassed both as introductions and refreshers; made all the more convenient by their cut down length -- an advantage which many, with busy schedules and or otherwise little time (or patience) to spare to sit through a full production, can or will no little appreciate. Each of these plays runs about an hour long and has been divided into two .mp3 files; with a .txt file included in each folder (here zipped) that lists all the cast members. Although there are some scratch sounds on a couple of the recordings, these come up rarely and at most take up not much more than about 5% of the whole set counted together.
* "A Midsummer Night's Dream" with Stanley Holloway, @ 49 MBs
* "Hamlet" with Sir Michael Redgrave, @ 49 MBs
* "Henry V" with Richard Burton, @ 47 MBs
* "Julius Caesar" with Peter Finch, @ 49 MBs
* "King Lear" with Sir Donald Wolfit, @ 44 MBs
* "Macbeth" with Sir Michael Redgrave, @ 53 MBs
* "Merchant of Venice" with Dame Peggy Ashcroft, @ 49 MBs
* "Othello" with Sir Ralph Richardson, Sir John Gielgud, @ 49 MBs
* "Romeo and Juliet" with Dame Flora Robson, Keith Michell, Virginia McKenna, @ 50 MBs
* "Taming of the Shrew" with Sian Phillips, Peter O'Toole, @ 49 MBs
Neither language, logic, or thought are justice or the force of justice. Yet there is no good reason why claims of justice cannot harmonize and be made consonant with and by means of them. And those who demand or would impose justice, yet who deny the necessity of language, logic, and thought, are invariably such that who in reality hate and flee justice.
Here's a baby picture you wouldn't want to miss (and that I came across by chance doing a Google picture search earlier today.)
["Telly Savalas - "I Shall Be Released" (Bob Dylan cover)"]
Charity is the measure of happiness; for the happier the person the more exhuberant, and therefore the more charitable.
It is understandable that we bemoan or lament how culturally, morally, intellectually, environmentally, and or economically how society seems succumb to lower standards and what is worse than before. Yet it is an over-simplistic and childish myth to conclude, as some do, that "the people" have decided that things be as they are and or that what happens is the result of forced "progress," unavoidable destiny, and or the innate and unstoppable course of national or worldly events. The truth is is that society has been and is being manipulated by criminal spirit people; who first are let in and granted safe haven by some dumbbell Faustus or Oafmore by means of whom they can properly set up shop. From this headquarters and basis, they can gain finances and followers necessary to work their mind control, political strong-arming, including assassination, black balling, extortion, and communication-jamming, to control society and oust opponents and nay-sayers to what they are doing. This force of criminality, which in many ways is clever, shrewd, and sophisticated, as well as being utterly ruthless and amoral as circumstances require or allow, becomes this seeming trend of what must take place; which people then interpret as the aforesaid ineluctable course of things. But let spirit people be recognized openly, let them be investigated and discussed scientifically, and efforts made to attack such as among them who are vicious and inhuman criminals, and this illusion of necessity and or the seemingly unchallengeable force of trends will be dispelled, and we will have at last the right conditions by means of which serious problems can be properly and adequately addressed.
If good does not punish and outlaw sinister evil, then it's merely a matter of time before such evil will assume for itself the duty and privilege of punishing and outlawing good.
