Translations:CP 03862/7/en: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "No one admires the Church more than I do, but to take the counter view to Homais, so far as to say that it is the guardianship of the progress of the human spirit, at all times, is a bit strong<ref name="n9" />. It is true that there are “non-believing” catholics. But those “non-believers” who I suppose are led by Maurras, did not bring great support for the French Justice at the time of the Dreyfus Affair. Regarding other countries, why choose such a cutting ton...") |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
No one admires the Church more than I do, but to take the counter view to Homais, so far as to say that it | No one admires the Church more than I do, but to take the counter view to Homais, so far as to say that it has been the guardianship of the progress of the human spirit, at all times, is a bit strong<ref name="n9" />. It is true that there are “non-believing” catholics. But those “non-believers” who I suppose are led by Maurras, did not bring great support for the French Justice at the time of the Dreyfus Affair. Regarding other countries, why choose such a cutting tone when discussing such disciplines like the arts where one can only prevail through persuasion. On many occasions, you say “we are listening” (meaning “we demand without permitting a response”). This is not the tone of the “soldiers of the Spirit”. And, even in a manifesto, despite wanting to be an all French force, you took a German tone. I do not need to tell you that if I was familiar with the “Bolshevik” manifesto I would certainly have found it a thousand times worse than yours. But the primary fault of the latter was being a manifesto in the first place. There cannot be anyone who honours France and serves it as well as your works. |
Revision as of 17:53, 2 October 2022
No one admires the Church more than I do, but to take the counter view to Homais, so far as to say that it has been the guardianship of the progress of the human spirit, at all times, is a bit strong[1]. It is true that there are “non-believing” catholics. But those “non-believers” who I suppose are led by Maurras, did not bring great support for the French Justice at the time of the Dreyfus Affair. Regarding other countries, why choose such a cutting tone when discussing such disciplines like the arts where one can only prevail through persuasion. On many occasions, you say “we are listening” (meaning “we demand without permitting a response”). This is not the tone of the “soldiers of the Spirit”. And, even in a manifesto, despite wanting to be an all French force, you took a German tone. I do not need to tell you that if I was familiar with the “Bolshevik” manifesto I would certainly have found it a thousand times worse than yours. But the primary fault of the latter was being a manifesto in the first place. There cannot be anyone who honours France and serves it as well as your works.
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>
tag; no text was provided for refs namedn9