There is something profound, but something quite akin that might be useful for further study or reflection is the *reaction* to derisu[s], if you will. Here's what Barclay said somewhere:
De ingeniis ad subitos iocos aut sententias valentibus. De aliis qui spontanea eloquentia diffunduntur. De hominibus tardioris lentiorisque prudentiae. Perfectos demum esse qui inter haec duo genera sunt positi... Sed cum omnia animalia id quo potissimum valent arcano impetu sentiant et eo uti ament, tum isti maxime sua eloquentia delectati, qua una insignes sunt, haud facile modum tenent, quamcumque rem dicendi libido rapuerit; ut mirari iure possis, in tanta imprudentia tam commode dici posse. Solutis deinde colloquiis, quae importune produxere, cum illos, quos loquendo fatigaverunt, laetae et porrectae frontis vident, non cogitant ab intempestivae orationis fastidio dimissos gaudere, sed ut perfusos magnifica voluptate, eo omine sinunt abire ut, si in se rursus inciderint, de eodem cibo gustent...Hi igitur, cum subito loquendum est, tardam aegriusve sequentem orationem habent, haerentque saepissime blandimentis lacessiti vel iocis, quae subiti et
expediti ingenii homines in quotidianis colloquiis tamquam levia tela contorquent. Neque autem sola verba aegre expediunt, sed sicubi etiam dicenda sententia quaerunt quid sentiant neque statim inveniunt.
What an excellent post, and it clarified a lot of doubts I had about these matters. I am sure you are busy, but I wanted to share a polemic piece I did a month or so ago that you might find amusing:
It is regarding Stuart Knechtle's public mishap with an Oriental Orthodox deacon at Harvard. Though I may have crossed the line in some areas (and now with your article as a guide, I know where those are!), I am convinced the fundamental intent of exposing this sort of silliness was justified. If you read, I hope you enjoy.
There is something profound, but something quite akin that might be useful for further study or reflection is the *reaction* to derisu[s], if you will. Here's what Barclay said somewhere:
De ingeniis ad subitos iocos aut sententias valentibus. De aliis qui spontanea eloquentia diffunduntur. De hominibus tardioris lentiorisque prudentiae. Perfectos demum esse qui inter haec duo genera sunt positi... Sed cum omnia animalia id quo potissimum valent arcano impetu sentiant et eo uti ament, tum isti maxime sua eloquentia delectati, qua una insignes sunt, haud facile modum tenent, quamcumque rem dicendi libido rapuerit; ut mirari iure possis, in tanta imprudentia tam commode dici posse. Solutis deinde colloquiis, quae importune produxere, cum illos, quos loquendo fatigaverunt, laetae et porrectae frontis vident, non cogitant ab intempestivae orationis fastidio dimissos gaudere, sed ut perfusos magnifica voluptate, eo omine sinunt abire ut, si in se rursus inciderint, de eodem cibo gustent...Hi igitur, cum subito loquendum est, tardam aegriusve sequentem orationem habent, haerentque saepissime blandimentis lacessiti vel iocis, quae subiti et
expediti ingenii homines in quotidianis colloquiis tamquam levia tela contorquent. Neque autem sola verba aegre expediunt, sed sicubi etiam dicenda sententia quaerunt quid sentiant neque statim inveniunt.
What an excellent post, and it clarified a lot of doubts I had about these matters. I am sure you are busy, but I wanted to share a polemic piece I did a month or so ago that you might find amusing:
https://andrewvargaspiano.substack.com/p/the-knechtlegate-scandal-vatican-b30?r=51z5wd
It is regarding Stuart Knechtle's public mishap with an Oriental Orthodox deacon at Harvard. Though I may have crossed the line in some areas (and now with your article as a guide, I know where those are!), I am convinced the fundamental intent of exposing this sort of silliness was justified. If you read, I hope you enjoy.
Thanks, Andrew! I'll add this to the list and take a look this week. Hope you're doing well.
Likewise! Thank you for your kindness in taking the time. It means a lot!