Yesterday I missed a close on martyr's day (no, not yet canonised)

Guillotining of Marie Antoinette.

Thank you, Elena Maria Vidal, I am linking to your blog, since you wrote about her.

Between myself and the author Elena Maria Vidal ...

Update: she has given a perfectly good answer in comments section (<- click)

... on her blog of Tea at Trianon, there was these last few days an online conversation on comments field of her blogpost "L'Autrichienne", about a film from 1990, about the process of Marie Antoinette.

A Polish Lady or Damsel was saying watching a youtube might be a mortal sin of stealing. Comes her answer, which I omit, my own, her acknowledgement of it, my comment.

My dear, taking what you have not paid for is not stealing if it is either a gift or borrowed.

If I get around a bakery at closing hours and ask for unsold left-overs, eating what I am given is not stealing.

And I cannot regard it as fully moral equivalent to stealing to go by train without paying, since the place used is given back when I have done my journey. Besides, St Francis of Assisi is patron of stowaway passengers, since the time he went on board a ship he had not paid for, heading for the Orient.

Now, regarding something on youtube is at worst no worse than stow-away passengers, at best same as taking what is given.

Thank you, Hans. No one pays for anything on YouTube. For that matter, I allow people to read my blog for free....

So do I, but I'd like to get paid if they print it, and I'd like to get printed. Some want to hold the paper, I prefer that format myself when I am not in a hurry to copy and paste a relevant quote or when I have a shelf to leave the book on.

This youtube is free, but from a concert that was paid for, and I'd like same to happen with my sheet music, and to get money for what satisfaction is had not only at home but also commercially from my scores.

Now that Pole said:

... I used to disregard the matter, but I've read in the examination of conscience that infringing copyrights is a mortal sin, if you like I'll try to find the link to this examination, I saw it on Catholic forum. ...

When I wanted to answer that - the blogpost was gone.

Maybe because of what she said about films being uploaded all the time - the blogpost linked to a youtube from that film - and youtube having no opportunity to check all (as if having sufficient staff for that were a problem) or just maybe for another reason.

Because this is the second time a conversation is cut short when I touch this note. Elena Maria, let us be straight: I am not actually charging any reader one cent for reading. If I had a system allowing micro-payments, I would gladly receive fifty cents from this and one euro from that and two dollar from sundry reader all over the world, and I would be better off. Since I do not have that, since sending me money costs, and costs so much that sending me less than ten or twenty euro or dollars at a time is a bad deal, I am offering readers a chance to make money from my work before sending me anything.

Here is the deal for music and here (ici) is the one for printing texts, whether from the main blog or from Creation vs Evolution or from haïku par HGL or any other blog I have not stated someone elses copyright is relevant.

If you think me dishonest, why have you not said so? If you think me honest, why not cooperate with my thing, I have cooperated with yours. By making publicity for your blog Tea at Trianon I have also made publicity for your books, printed as they are by whoever you struck a deal with. My deal is wth the readers, I have given them that license. Each one can chose whatever scale he can afford and whatever suits him best. Including, as would be the case for most but not all not to do anything except read, not to send me one pence. If I am without a cent myself, it is not because of the freedoms given my readers by me, but because someone is blocking the maybe interested ones from profiting. Or, because this being so unusual, they need me to explain it to them. Which brings me to: why delete a post on which I did that?

If you think me for some or other reason not dishonest but still disastrous ... again why is that?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Bibl. Glacière/Paris
3/IX/2010, Martyrs de Septembre

Ghasp ... !*

Citation:

Tous ces tibias, ces péronés, ces morceaux de cubitus, marchandés, pillés, vendus, revendus, légués. Une religiosité du Moyen Age ne peut plus être notre religion.

Auteur: Henri Queffélec
Titre et page: Saint Yves, 31
Éditions Ramsay, 1987

Je note:

• 1.) La mort n'est plus pour le chrétien ce qu'elle était pour les justes de l'Ancien Testament. Le pauvre Lazare - identique selon St Grégoire le Dialogiste avec le St Lazare frère de Ste Marthe et Ste Marie, le Quatre-Jours-Mort et ensuite ressuscité - fut parmi les derniers de voir les Limbes des Justes tels qu'ils étaient avant que le Seigneur soit venu piller l'Enfer.
  
  Mais déjà pendant l'Attente de son venu, un corps d'un prophète à ensevelir a ressuscité un cadavre;
  
  
• 2.) Il y a certes des réligiosités du Moyen Age qui ne sont pas du tout notre religion. Je note entre autres les Cathars - explorés récemment par Elena Maria Vidal dans son roman The Night's Dark Shade (pas encore en français) - par contre, le culte des réliques étant commun aux Catholiques Romains, aux Orthodoxes séparés de Rome, aux Monophysites ou Miaphysites séparés de Rome et Constantinople, aux Nestoriens séparés de Rome, Constantople et Alexandrie, ceux derniers y trouvent même un remplacement pour le rite normal de l'Extrème Onction, je ne vois que très mal comment un homme qui se réclame d'un quelconque écuménisme catholique pourrait réléguer les réliques - le plus souvent ossements, parfois des corps préservés (quand il s'agit de réliques primaires) - à une quelconque religiosité du Moyen Age qui ne pourrait plus être la notre;
  
  
• 3.) À part les Cathars, l'auteur cité ajoutera peut-être "et ce que les Cathars provocaient comme réaction" - est-ce que le Moyen Age eût été si mauvais que ça?
  
  Si l'on veut du progrès dans la réflexion faite par des chrétiens, c'est difficile de trouver après l'ère délimité en Occident comme patristique du meilleur que St Thomas ou St Grégoire Palamas.
  
  Quelqu'un m'ayant provoqué à relire le debut de Prima Pars**, je me suis arreté sur la similitude entre Q. XII et la doctrine philocalique.
  
  J'avais déjà noté la parallélité entre le Cinquième Concile de Constantinople - très partiellement condamné, donc probablement implicitement assez généreusement approuvé par Rome*** - et les textes contre le rationnalisme au Concile du Vatican des ans 1869 et 70./HGL

*Le titre est l'orthographe anglais de l'exclamation exprimant "mais quel horreur!"
**de la Somme Théologique de St Thomas d'Aquin
***L'idée que la condamnation d'une minorité des thèses équivaut à l'approbation tacite au moins préliminaire des autres me vient de l'abbé Bryan Houghton, qui l'a noté sur les condamnations du quiétisme défendu par Fénélon: Rome n'a pas condamné tout ce que Bossuet trouvait mauvais, loin de ça, selon le chapître liturgique de Prêtre rejeté.