Shakespeare Productions Online

This is a public service, with educational intention. Some would be available from libraries, even if it's interlibrary loan. No doubt streaming services can be useful -- and/but anything you want to keep, purchase. 

I've linked mostly to professional productions. A few are pretty awful (!), and some are (sometimes surprisingly) excellent.  Worth noting are the '65 LLL and the Chamberlain Hamlet; Stewart's Macbeth is close to flawless (aside from the sisters); the Jayston Macbeth has impressively intelligent performances (likewise, aside from the sisters). A few amateur efforts are included for the POV, when too few professional productions are available -- the disqualifications are bad sound and/or a distant static camera. Just for the history of it, I’ve included non-snippet silent films. There's more available, but I'll add as I please.

Links go dead, so there's that: Kozintsev's dubbed Hamlet, for example, and Maximilian Schell's from German TV -- although it's available after a manner of speaking. There are some sporadically hard-to-find works here. Sadly, the deep and vasty wood of the web is no safe place, and viruses lurk. If you find a dead link, or a toxic one, pls let me know (since 2016 exactly NOBODY has done this).  Be that as it may, in your idle or intentful hours, here's a place to invest your time.

COMEDY / ROMANCE
Two Gentlemen of Verona BBC RSC (VK).   One  Two sub  Film 2019 TxSF Hofstra LLCC (static camera) Yihjanmae  YT A Spray of Plum Blossoms 1931 Chinese	Audio Marlowe Soc. 1  2  3  4  5 OSF Ark (VK) Argo (VK)
______________________ Taming of the Shrew BBC   Burton  or VK Fairbanks ACT (VK) Dews SVS Stratford  2016 Studio One Globe One Two (VK)   RSC  Woke ONE. TWO UAA (vk) Animated or VK LATV Kiss Me, Kate (VK) Stage   Film	______________________ Audio Howard 1  2  3  4  5 OSF Ark (VK) Argo (VK) BBC ( 1988 VK) Columbia CBS (click #137) Barrymore GP LS O’Toole
______________________ Comedy of Errors BBC or VK FKB  One   Two SATP SP RSC 78 (VK) NT 2012   One  Two Globe 2012  One. Two LATV RSC Strat Fest 89 Angoor 84 Hindi	______________________ Audio Caedmon OSF Ark (VK) LS Neville Argo (VK)
______________________ Love's Labour's Lost BBC BBC 1965 BBC PotM Brett 1975 Branagh 2000 WSU  1  2  3 BYU Globe (VK)  ok RSC  One  Two Stratford Fest  2017 LATV Opera	______________________ Audio Arkangel or VK Marlowe Soc. 1-3  3-5 OSF GP Argo (VK) LS Finch
______________________ Midsummer Night's Dream BBC or VK Hall rsc 96 Rooney  or VK Kline (VK) Globe 2013 Globe 2016 BBC   or VK Animated or VK Taymor 14 2018 NTLive. 2019 ONE.  TWO Noble 1996 (VK) Papp 1982   ONE  TWO TxSF LATV Benny Hill 1964.  HERE    HERE Trnka 1959 subtitles Kemp 85 Opera  Silent 1909	______________________ Audio BBC on 3 or YT 3 or VK Ark (VK) Naxos (VK) Scofield  One &  Two McKellen 2013 Argo  (VK) OTR OTR CRD LS Holloway OSF
______________________ Merchant of Venice BBC or VK Pacino Olivier ABC 96 RSC 2015 (VK) Globe  One. Two Nunn 2001 (VK) OR YT Welles (fragment) Tchaikowsky opera Silent 1911	______________________ Audio Caedmon  One   Two Marlowe Soc. 1  2  3  4  5 Redgrave OSF Ark (VK) BBC (2000 VK) Welles LS Ashcroft
______________________ Merry Wives of Windsor BBC Globe  2012  (VK) Globe 2019 St. Louis One  Two (static camera) RSC. 2018 One  Two LATV TxSF 2012 FH Opera Opera	______________________ Audio OSF Ark (VK) GP
______________________ Much Ado about Nothing BBC or VK Tennant Branagh or VK Globe 2012  or VK  2012 (!) RSC UVU TSF One Two TxSF Rice PSC Park Strat Fest Opera	______________________ Audio Caedmon Gielgud Russell OSF Ark (VK) BBC 2001 Tennant (VK) Columbia GP LS
______________________ As You Like It BBC  Olivier Branagh Globe or VK 2015 Animated or VK LATV RSC 2019 NT 2016 Stewart 2019 gay Strat Fest CBC 83	______________________ Audio Redgrave  1-3   3-5 Marlowe Soc. 1  2  3  4  5 Caedmon ( 1963 VK) Olivier One  Two OSF Ark (VK BBC (2015 VK) NT 1968 One  Two Columbia LS Neville
______________________ Twelfth Night BBC   Branagh 1988 1986 Guiness 1969 Fraser (excerpts) Nunn-Kingsley  1996 (VK) RSC 2018. One. Two Globe  2012  One. Two.   Globe 2021 One Two NTlive 2017  One Two Strat 2011 2003 (VK) Linc Cent 1998 TxSF 2015 Animated or VK Soviet 1955 (VK – Eng sub) Silent 1910	______________________ Audio Welles 1973 Tennant Godfrey 1-2  3-5 BBC OSF Ark (VK) BBC 1998 (VK) BBC 1999 (VK) On 3 (VK) Scofield  1  2  3  4  5 Columbia Barrymore LS Smith
______________________ Troilus and Cressida BBC RSC 2019  ONE   TWO SAI One Two (static camera) Arden Globe 2009 The Face of Love 1954	______________________ Audio Arkangel  or Ark (VK) Marlowe Soc. One Two OSF BBC (VK) Brett (VK) LS BBC 2005 (VK)
______________________ Measure for Measure BBC 1979  "1990" CalArts ACT One Two BBC 1995 (VK) 2007 (VK) RSC. 2019 ONE. TWO Globe ONE Two LATV TxSF	______________________ Audio Richardson OSF Ark (VK) Argo (VK) BBC 2004 (VK) Marlowe Soc. 1  2  3  4 5 LS Portman
______________________ All's Well That Ends Well BBC   Globe ONE TWO  One Two (VK) LATV	______________________ Audio OSF Ark (VK) BBC(VK)  YT LS Redgrave
______________________ Pericles BBC Strat Fest 2015 L Sch One Two	______________________ Audio Scofield  Here   1-3  4-5 Ark (VK) LA TW (VK) OSF
______________________ Winter's Tale BBC KBTC 2015 OK  VK   One Two.  Bentley Animated or VK RSC Sher 1998   YT   or  VK RSC  2021.  ONE.  TWO Globe. 18  One Two LATV Silent 1910	______________________ Audio Caed 1961 Gielgud BBC 1998 or VK McKellen OSF Ark  (VK) LS Portman Argo  VK
______________________ Cymbeline BBC Harris.  OK WSC WSU RSC. ONE TWO LATV Silent 1913	______________________ Audio Karloff  1-2  3-5 OSF Ark (VK) BBC 3  (VK)
______________________ Tempest BBC Mirren Burton Evans 1960 Strat 1982 Plummer stratford 2010 One    Two Strat 2019 sub   VK RSC 2017 Globe  2014 LATV Prospero’s Books -                             1 2 3 or VK Jarman 1979 (!) or VK BLC Animated or VK Purcell Ballet Dryden Silent 1908	______________________ Audio BBC Guilgud Redgrave 1-2  3-5 Arkangel Marlowe Soc. 1  2  3  4  5 OSF GP BBC 1974 (VK) BBC 2001 (VK) On 3 (VK) Argo (VK) CBC  (VK) LS Wolfit
===================== HISTORY
King John BBC   Stratford RSC 2021 WSC (static camera) globe Silent 1899	Audio OSF Ark (VK) BBC 1984 (VK) Argo VC
____________________________________________ “AN AGE OF KINGS” – 1960 BBC series .  Richard II  /  Henry IV1,2   /   Henry V  /      Henry VI1,2,3          / Richard III .          1 2    /     3 4 - 5 6     /        7 8      /   9 10 - 11- 12 13   /   14 15   (VK) Here  (OK)                                                                              The Hollow Crown 2012 Richard II  - Henry IV ONE - TWO A  B  -  Henry V   .
______________________ Richard II BBC or VK ESC   Tennant RSC or 1 2 3 (VK) 2013 Shaw HC     BSS NTL 2019 One. Two  Globe Bard 1982. One  Two	______________________ Audio OSF Ark (VK) HC (VK) BBC 1979 (VK) 2014 (VK) Gielgud Marlowe Soc. OTR LS Redgrave
______________________________________________ Falstaff” Chimes at Midnight    OK or VK – Welles At the Bear’s Head opera Opera
______________________ Henry IV, Part I BBC or VK ESC   or VK HC      or  VK Firth 1a 1b 2a 2b 3 4 5 Globe One  Two (VK) RSC  One  Two (VK) The King 2019 H4 2020	______________________ Audio McKern OSF BBC 1973 (VK) BBC 1980 (VK) BBC 1999 (VK) Ark (VK) HC  (VK) Marlowe Soc. 1  2  3  4  5 Columbia LS Connery Argo (VK)
______________________ Henry IV, Part II BBC or VK ESC HC     or  VK Globe One  Two (VK) RSC One Two (VK) The King 2019  H4 2020	______________________ Audio Caedmon  1-2  3-5 OSF Ark (VK) BBC 1973  YT  or VK BBC 1980 (VK) BBC 1999 (VK) LS Wolfit McKern Argo (VK)
______________________ Henry V BBC ESC Olivier or YT Branagh    or VK HC   or  VK Globe RSC  One  Two (VK) LATV The King 2019 Babakitis 2010	______________________ Audio 1977 McKellen OSF Ark (VK) BBC 1981 (VK) OTR LS Burton
_____________________________________________ Henry VI (1,2,3)  & Richard III WARS OF THE ROSES - 1965 BBC series HC: The Wars of the Roses 2016              Henry VI  ONE - TWO - Richard III
______________________ Henry VI, Part I BBC   (VK) ESC 2008 HC   or  VK  VK or YT RSC   reading	______________________ Audio OSF Ark (VK) BBC 1982 (VK)
______________________ Henry VI, Part II BBC ESC HC    or VK	______________________ Audio OSF Ark (VK) BBC 1982 (VK)
______________________ Henry VI, Part III BBC HC     or VK or YT	______________________ Audio OSF Ark (VK) BBC 1982 (VK)
______________________ Richard III BBC or VK ESC McKellen  or  YT Olivier or VK HC    or  VK 2014 BJU Hofstra. YT Almeida One Two (VK) Looking for Richard (adaptation) Animated or VK or YT Spacey, Globe Silent 1911	______________________ Audio Olivier Olivier HR OSF Ark (VK) BBC 1982 (VK) BBC 2013 (VK) Barrymore (click #284) Barrymore LS Finch RMT (paraphrase)
______________________ Henry VIII BBC Globe  One  Two (VK)	______________________ Audio OSF Ark (VK)
===================== TRAGEDY
Titus Andronicus BBC Hopkins  2006 Seoul RSC.   ONE    TWO Globe (VK) LATV	Audio Caedmon 1-4 OSF Ark (VK)
______________________ Romeo and Juliet BBC Zeffirelli or VK Howard 1936 DiCaprio   Bloom     or YT 1975 One  Two 1982 1988 (VK) SFVP 2001 Carlei 2013? 2014  or  VK KBTC  OK    One Two (VK) Globe 2010 One Two RSC 2018 One Two NT 2021 Strat 2017 Globe 2019 Harvey   OK sub 1954 TxSF Studio One Animated Hofstra Stratford 1993 Globe 2000 Port Ballet:  Prokofiev.   Bolshoi 89 Tchaikovsky 2013 Soviet 1955 ballet Opera Silent 1911 1920 comedy	______________________ Audio 2012 BBC Finney 1  2  3  4  5 Marlowe Soc.  1  2  3  4  5 Caedmon (1961 VK) OSF RSC Bran (VK) Ark (VK) BBC 3 (VK) On 3  (VK) BBC 2001 Bran (VK) BBC 2003 (VK) LA TW (VK) Naxos (VK) Aud (VK) Aud (VK) 1993 (VK) GP Bandel OTR ASA CRD LS Michell RMT (paraphrase)
______________________ Julius Caesar BBC. OK Brando Heston.  OK 1950 Robards (VK) 1970 Stephens 2009 RSC 2012 (VK) RSC 2017. ONE.  TWO Globe One Two (VK) Studio One Cinema 5 Animated or VK NT 2018 Merlo 1965 Span Opera Silent cc Music  1914	______________________ Audio Welles Caedmon 1966 Richardson 1-2  3-5 Marlowe Soc. 1-2   3  4  5 MDS  1  2  3  4  5 Brando OSF Ark (VK) LA TW (VK) BBC 1980 (VK) Audio (VK) NT 1964 Argo 1972 Rylands Audio Columbia GP OTR OTR LS Finch RMT (paraphrase)
______________________ Hamlet BBC. 1980 OK Olivier 1948 sub  or YT or VK Kozintsev1964.  YT  One Two (sub)  1 2 (dub) Plummer 1964  OK Burton  1964. or here or here Williamson1969 (VK).    OK Chamberlain 1970 Crisp or  VK  (!) Gibson 1990   OK  Kline  1990 YT  or OK One Two Branagh  1996 Hawke  2000 Hallmark 2000 One  Two Brook    OK   2002 Tennant   RSC 2009 NTL Kinnear 2010.   One Two NTL Cumberbatch 2015 HERE  or VK Peake (!) RET 2015 One.  Two RSC Stratford 2016   OK Strat Fest HERE - ONE Two  Globe 2015 Globe 2018 woke Almeida 2018 Fodor RedSC 1  2  3  4 LATV Hofstra 2011 BJU BLC Mundell 2003  Bristol Old Vic 2022 GSC Ramsay 2011 Animated Evans  Hallmark 1953 Schell 1961  Rylance  Law   MST3K Gassman 1955 Italian Haider  2013 Hindi Chinese 1990 Rock Opera (VK) Opera Dean Glyndebourne   VK sub The Bad Sleep Well Kurosawa OK In the Bleak Midwinter (VK) Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead (VK) Johnny Hamlet (VK) Prince of Jutland.   Here 1913 Silent Nielson 1921	______________________ Audio Welles One Two Olivier Burton Scoffield or 1-2 3-5 Gielgud Branagh Audio OSF Ark (VK) Argo (VK) Naxos (VK) Oregon (VK) BBC 1971 (VK) BBC 1999 (VK) BBC 2014 (VK) OTR LS Redgrave LATW RMT (paraphrase)  Bristol
______________________ Othello BBC Hopkins Welles  1951 Olivier 1965  Marshall 81. YT McKellen (VK)  Nunn 1990  OK Fishburne 1995 or  VK Bentley Nat Th   One Two (VK) RSC 2015 Strat ONE  TWO Strat  LATV Globe One Two (VK).  2007 OK Soviet 1955 (VK – Eng  sub) Animated or VK Richardson adaptation Eccleston 2001  All night long 1962 A Double Life 1947. OK Gassman 1956 Italian  Omkara Hindi 2006 1922 Opera Verdi Zeffirelli (subtitles HERE) 1973  Met 2012 Act IV Rossini	______________________ Audio Arkangel McGregor OSF BBC (2004 VK) Ark (VK) Donmar (VK) Hiddleston Robeson Widmark GP LS Gielgud RMT (paraphrase)
______________________ King Lear BBC OR VK Welles 1953 Kozintsev  (dubbed) Scofield  1971 Jones  1974  YT.  or  YT or  VK Hordern BBC PotM 1975 Olivier 1983   Holm 1998 (VK) RSC RSC Sher 2016 McKellen   2008 McKellen    OK   2018 Strat Fest sub 2015 Here Blessed  (VK) Feore Almeida Pryce 2012 Hopkins 2018 Magee (VK) Sh Lives 2016 RET Whare (VK)  Globe 2017. One  Two BJU Marshall Godard (‘adaptation’) or VK My Kingdom Ran subtitle Verdi opera Silent 1910 Silent 1916	______________________ Audio Gielgud Scofield 1-2  2-5 Scales OSF Ark  One Two (VK) BBC 1983 (VK) BBC 1988 (VK) BBC 4 2016 (VK) Argo  (VK) Welles LS Wolfit Columbia
______________________ Timon of Athens BBC Stratford   One   Two.    VK RSC 2019 St. Louis  One  Two (static camera)	______________________ Audio Jacobi OSF Ark (VK)
______________________ Macbeth BBC or  VK   Stewart. 2010  OK McKellen 1979 Welles. 1948 Evans  1954 Evans  1960 SConnery  1961 Polanski  1971 Fassbender  2015. or VK 1 2 3 JConnery 1997 Pertwee 1998 Sher RSC 2001   Bentley Folger/Teller 2009 One. Two Liverpool 2011 Branagh NT 2013 RSC Eccleston 2018. One  Two NT 2018 Kinnear   ONE   TWO Monkman 2017  Strat Fest 2017 Strat Globe 2014 One Two    One Two Globe 2020 Almeida 2021 Washington 2021. . VK BJU LATV Jayston.    YT Brett (!) Falkenstein 2006  2011 MJC Hofstra BJU PBS graphic zoom 2021 Estate (VK) Throne of Blood (adaptation)  subtitle Animated or VK Berlin Maqbool 2003 Hindi Sangrador 2001 Tarr (subtitles) Verdi:  Sub  Ferro  Opera  Met  Milan 2021	______________________ Audio Welles Arkangel  or  VK Scofield Guiness One  Two Caedmon 1960 Marlow Soc. 1  2  3  4  5 OSF BBC Williamson (VK) BBC 2000 (VK) OTR OTR BP GP Barrymore LS Redgrave Audio 1 2 3 4  5 RMT (paraphrase)
______________________ Antony and Cleopatra BBC Spread of the Eagle 1963 1  2  3 Heston    Nunn/Scoffield   or   VK Dalton (!) NTL Stratford      OK RSC 2017 . One Two  Globe  One Two  One Two(VK) Barber (opera)  One  Two	______________________ Audio BBC OSF Ark (VK) BBC 3 (Bran VK) Scales 1  2  3  4   5 LS Finch Pendant 1  2  3a  3b  4  5 1978  One  Two RMT (paraphrase)
______________________ Coriolanus BBC Fiennes 2011 Hiddleston NTl 2014 Donmar VK    NTL 2020 Stratford 2019 RSC 17 Globe WSU 1  2  3 Burkoff One  Two Studio One 1951 St. Louis One Two (static camera)	______________________ Audio Burton  1-2  3-5 Marlowe Soc. 1  2  3  4  5 OSF Ark (VK) Argo (VK) BBC (VK) LS Stride
========== Two Noble Kinsmen Globe St. Louis One  Two (static camera) VUW	========== Audio Ark (VK) LibraVox
______________________ Edward III St. Louis (static camera)	______________________ Audio LibraVox 1  2  3  4  5
______________________ Sir Thomas More Stage, amateur	______________________ Audio BBC LibraVox
______________________ Cardenio  “Double Falsehood” – article PBSF 1995 MPP  One Two Three WP  1  2  3  4	______________________ Audio LibraVox
________________________________________________ Edmund Ironside - Article One  Two reading  Text ________________________________________________ Arden of Faversham WPS (single  camera) French ________________________________________________ The  Life and Death of Jack Straw Text ________________________________________________ Soliman and Perseda Text ________________________________________________ The Famous Victories of Henry V Text ________________________________________________ The True Chronicle History of King Leir Text ________________________________________________ The Troublesome Reign of King John Text ________________________________________________ The Taming of  a  Shrew One   Two Text ________________________________________________ The True Tragedy of Richard III Text ________________________________________________ Thomas of Woodstock Text ________________________________________________ The Lamentable Tragedy of Locrine Text ________________________________________________ Fair Em, the Miller's Daughter of Manchester Text _________________________________________________________ Tarleton’s News Out of Purgatory Text ======================= POETRY Venus and Adonis McGill BBC _______________________________________ The Rape of Lucrece Burton Logan One  Two Argo (VK) ___________________________________________ The Phoenix and the Turtle OAC Logan _______________________________________ A Lover’s Complaint Squire Argo _______________________________________ Sonnets Gielgud Dove (VK) Naxos (VK) Butler (VK) OTR Marlow Soc CL 1-5  6 ============================ 2 gent.  globe.  nt  shrew. nt com err nt lll nt drea, rsc merch nt mw nt much as nt as u    nt. rsc TROI. NT MRASUR NT AllS WEll  NT RSC PERI.  GLOBE  NT. RSC   WINTER. NT CYMB. NT. GLB\ TEMP. NT K J NT GLB R 2 NT H4 NT H5 NT H6 G N R R3 G N R  H8 N R  TITUS. NT TIMON.  NT. GLB COR NT

"Jesus as Human Being"

That only took six months!  Twenty-eight chapters.  Approx sixty thousand words. [Now over 80k.]

As I  wrote it I went back and added and moved things around, etc.  I ended up following through with various thoughts, doing research as it pleased me.  So almost every chapter is significantly revised.  The Introduction, as it is now called, indicates this.

"Jesus as Human Being".  [Now "Jesus Human".]

You may read it.  But the price is that you leave a brief comment if you spot a typo etc or have any brief factual material to briefly add.  I don't want to gossip.

J

PJ: XXVIII

See HERE

Amazon

Customer Review 
 9 of 19 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
*****Strauss is my Hero of Christion Scholarship, December 5, 1999
By A Customer
This review is from: Strauss Life of Jesus: From George Eliot VOLUME 1 (Paperback)

My Hero of Christian Theolgy
I have read many books about Bible and Jesus ranging from missionary works to the works of scholars such as Prof. B. Metzger. Never have I come across a Book such as Strauss' Life of Jesus. About 1000 pages (in English)of rigorous and detailed analysis of the Life of Jesus in the four Gospels without bias (as far as I can tell).It is a big loss to the humanity that Strauss not only was denied teaching positions (for which he was overqualified: knowing Hebrew, Greek, Latin as well as German and having a genius' intelligence) also his marvelous work(s) were suppressed and kept away from the humanity. I hope and pray that many more Christians will have the opportunity to read this enlightening book of Strauss and learn some of the facts about their scriptures and Faith which are kept away from the believers by the Church for millennia. (My use of millennia about one month before 2000 may sound inaccurate, how ever if we take Matthew's word that Jesus was born in the Days of Herod (not paying attention to the fact that Luke assigns birth of Jesus to the time when Quarinius was Governor of Syria which didn't take place until a decade after the death of Herod the Great(Strauss' Life of Jesus & Westminster Dictionary of the Bible))and knowing that Herod died around 4 BC. (Westminster Dictionary of the Bible) also considering the two year(from the killing of children under two year of age) stay of Jesus and His Mother and Joseph in Egypt (Only in Matthew, no other Evangelist noticed this incident including Josephus who recorded detailed life of Herod (Staruss' Life of Jesus)) before Herod died, Jesus must have been born around 6 BC so that for those faithful to Matthew (rather than Luke) true second millennium was 1994. Therefore we are already in the second millennium. TOO BAD WEE MISSED THE 2ND MILLENIAL CELEBRATIONS.)
In concluding, Strauss is a forgatton hero among Christian Scholarsip
My God Have Mercy on Strauss.

Comments
 Jack H says:

 One appreciates your faith, even fervor, for your, um, daring skepticism. One cannot argue with it -- faith is the evidence of things unseen. But, if details actually matter to you, consider that Luke is using Greek, not Latin; 'hegmoneuontos' is generally translated as 'governor', but it's not specific to the Latin title of 'Legate', the actual position of Quirinius in Syria. 'Hegmoneuontos' can be rendered as Legate or Propraetor or Procurator or Quaestor  or Praefectus, or perhaps even Censor, cf Cato the Elder. Further, Tacitus records Pontius Pilate's title in Judea as 'Procurator' (a sort of military CFO), while the Pilate Stone has it as "Prefect" -- see?

Further, the correct title for the Governor of Syria could not be legatus Augusti pro praetore, which was used only for the  senatorial provinces, and always filled by a Senator.  "Legate" as a term means a general who is a senator.  Sentius Saturninus 'governed' Syria 9-7 BC, and Josephus tells us that Quinctilius Varus succeeded him in the time of Herod.  This does not exclude Quirinius from coeval titled responsibilities in that region.  Surely you see how loosely titles can be used.

Further, one of the grand old men of archaeology, W. Ramsay, discovered several inscriptions that showed Q to be "governor" of Syria twice, at least.

Further, for at least three centuries the empire required a census about every 14 years. The date of proclamation and the date of completion are, as you might see, necessarily not the same -- it would take years. The Q census of 5-6 AD is the official announcement. The movement of peoples to their home towns would be even later. See? The first census, announced prior to Herod's death, would have been announced c. 8 BC, and completed locally as circumstances allowed. Too vague? Only to those unfamiliar with the raw data of history.

Further, Greek, like everything, can be ambiguous. Luke, here, can be fairly translated as: "This census was before that made when Quirinius was governor of Syria."

Re your dismay or glee that Dionysius the Inadequate was off by a few years, well, he was off by a few years, therefore Luke, the Bible, and Christianity are wrong and false. QED.  Hurrah.

 Bothersome, what?

 Dogma, sir or madam, bites.


 J

*On 'Crito' and How I Am Smarter than Socrates

YT

Socrates had a demon. Of course, a daemon, but a demon. I’m reading Plato again, after 40 years, and I just thought I’d share the fact, that Socrates was a demoniac.

 Well, maybe not, but maybe. I’ve got the complete works, 1800 pages, and I’ll go through it over the next few months. I spent probably 20 minutes whiting-out the loopy girl-writing with which some deb had defaced a number of pages – you know, with hearts for i-dots and so on. It was intolerable. I don’t mind the pink highlighting, but the girl-writing all over the margins was too much. She read only the Apology and books 1,2,3 and 5 of the Republic, so it’s not too bad. I didn’t like the Republic the first time I read it, but that was the ‘70s and this is the ‘Teens, so maybe it got better.

 In the Apology, his defense at his trial, Socrates speaks of how he’s always had an inner voice that told him not to do any wrong thing. So he always knew he was doing right, because he obeyed the voice of his familiar. You might not call that a demon, but he does. He was accused of atheism, denying the gods of Athens while introducing other gods, and of corrupting the youth of the city. I won’t go into that. He affirms his belief in the city’s gods, and denies the corruption. Frankly, he proves his case, but he’d made many enemies, what with constantly proving how not-wise everyone else was, and the majority of his jury consisted of such people. It was a close vote – out of the 500 jurymen, if memory serves, a shift of thirty votes would have acquitted him – 221 to 279, then.

 The vote was corrupt. This was not justice. He did prove his case. He was innocent, according to the evidence Plato gives. In the next dialogue along, Crito, Crito comes as a friend and wants Socrates to escape. Socrates uses his method and demonstrates how he has no choice but to obey the verdict, and die. And here’s why I’m writing this. It’s not that Socrates has a demon. It’s that his logic is wrong. Yes, I, your humble author, am smarter than Socrates and Plato. And Aristotle. After nearly two and a half thousand years, I, even I shall bring light.

 First he gets Crito to agree that it’s always wrong to harm someone, even if they harm you. And this is true. Then again, it’s not. What is harm? It involves motive, and justice (eg, the surgeon and the cutthroat). Socrates is not against justice, and not against punishment – he argues for it. Punishment that corrects a wrong-doer is actually a good, a painful good; punishment that does not correct, hurts only, and is a harm to the recipient; it may be good for the city, good for justice, good to the gods, but it is harm to its victim. True? Yet the greater good is that justice be done, regardless of its effect on the person punished. So it is not wrong to harm someone, if they harm you; as here described, it’s justice.

 Next Socrates demonstrates that the citizen must obey the laws. To break the law is to destroy the city – we would say, it violates the social contract. And he is correct. Then again, he’s not. To break a law is not to destroy the law – it is an insult, a disrespect, but not an annihilation; to disobey a parent is not to kill a parent. If he planned to run away, the state personified would come to him and say, “Do you not by this action you are attempting intend to destroy us, the Laws, and indeed the whole City…? Or do you think it possible for a city not to be destroyed if the verdicts of the courts have no force but are nullified and set to naught by private individuals?” If his reply were, ‘The courts have wronged me’? The reply would be, ‘Was that the agreement? – or was it to respect the judgments’. Contracts must be obeyed.

And he’s right. Then again, he’s not. Here we need to get, uh, philosophical. What if the city is taken over and ruled by a tyrant? And the tyrant, whose word is the law, arbitrarily condemns? The contract is to obey the law, and thus here to cozen tyranny? What if it’s not a tyrant, but a corrupt jury? Is the citizen’s contract with the law, or is it with justice. Is it right to be complicit in the city’s corruption of justice and of the meaning of law? What is law for? What does it protect? Stability and power only? Or does it protect what is good, what is right, and just, and beautiful. Well, it’s only law, the product of politicians, but there is an ideal behind this sad fact that is the inspiration of what a society is – the communal striving for the greater good. Innocent people may be sacrificed for a great cause. A corrupt jury acting out of spite and committing judicial murder is not that.

 Says Socrates, “one must obey the laws of one’s city and country, or persuade it as to the nature of justice.” To persuade, one needs opportunity, which may require time. Socrates complains in his Apology that by law he had not enough time to properly defend himself. There is an illogic here: he is required to persuade, but not given what is needed to do so. The law requires what it forbids. Why doesn’t this most clear-sighted of men see this?

 If the City went to war and Socrates believed the war was unjust, if he yet agreed to fight he must do so. Or he could refuse and protest, and attempt to dissuade the city from the war, and if not convincing, he must accept the consequences, most likely of death. He must be true either to his agreement, or to his conscience. Neither is shameful. To refuse to fight and refuse to accept the consequences would be reprehensible.

 Likewise, Socrates agreed to obey the law, and to accept the consequences if he didn’t. Yet he had an obligation not only to obey the law, but to protect the city. He must do what he could to keep his city just, to keep it from committing injustice, to keep it from spilling innocent blood, in this case his own. That after all was why there was a curse and a plague upon Thebes – the gods were displeased by the unknown crimes of Oedipus. Socrates’ obligation was to not allow an innocent man’s blood to pollute the earth and curse his city. That it was his own blood was irrelevant.

 The truest argument Socrates makes is that it’s not the laws but men who wrong him, so he should obey the laws. But by obeying the law he is harming the men, by making them guilty of wronging him. And it is wrong to cause harm to those who harm you. Socrates is not being Socratic with himself. He does it so well, usually. Wonder what’s up.

 He wanted to die, and no argument could have changed this. At his trial he was given a voice to choose his own punishment, and he chose free meals for life – the appropriate response for his actions. His accuser urged death. In Crito, Socrates admits he could have suggested exile. You know, life. He talks about how ridiculous his life would be as an exile, but what does that have to do with justice? What has ridicule to do with the conduct of a righteous man? Why is public opinion a factor now, when it never mattered to him before? Irrelevant, inconsistent and illogical. Odd. Given the two posited choices, his multiple enemies chose the one that was, you know, a punishment. He arranged his death, conspired in it – a good defense, and if he didn’t get justice he wanted the greatest injustice. Doesn’t seem moderate.

 It’s not that his demon, in its silence, proved the rightness of his course. It’s that his demon, as is the wont of subtle evil beings, was truthful until the greatest harm could be done. For 2,414 years, a catastrophic argument has been supported by the authority of a man who was correct in almost everything.  Scores of millions of people have been murdered by totalitarian states because of the error.

The citizen is not the property of the state.


J

Creepy Feeling

I haven't been active here, as once I was, save for the current and obvious project.  But I'm called to entertain the faithful readers of these pages with a report of a sort of communication that's been going on.  Every few years in the history of this blog there have been individuals who want me to be aware of them in a deeper way than is, well, normal.  If it's just some snarky punk, I'm pretty brutal.  But sometimes it's mental illness, in which case, frankly, silence is the most prudent response.  You don't know about the illness, though, for sure, unless you engage.  That's what's been happening.

Someone with an interest in arcana and a good internet connection appears to note individual words in some of the historical works I've posted, and then proceeds to dump virtually random excepts in the comments of a single post at Historic Christianity.  No rhyme or reason, no attempt at framing a context.  Now that it will be over, there will have been about 150 such comments.  No formatting or any attempt at such, very many multiple empty lines between items.  Chaotic.  Anonymous.

Below, the few comments I actually posted, with my own attempts at civility. The // represents multiple empty lines.  I offer it for what it's worth.

============

At July 8, 2015, Anonymous Anonymous said... 

As keen as I remain regarding internet socializing as something best avoided (multiple occasions of having had computers compromised, and other annoyances etc.) the misalignment of the pictured cruciform zodiac bothered me to distraction. Pardon the intervention.

[I've deleted the rest, very similar to what follows.]

At July 8, 2015, Anonymous Anonymous said... 
not relative to the post but rather than scatter notes everywhere

BABYLON

 לבב (lebab) and לב (leb), both meaning heart, come from.

 @ abarim-publications.com/Dictionary/l/l-b-b.html

 IDOLS

 Most significantly, however, maskit is used to refer to looking at "the chamber of images" in one's mind.

 (HEART / LE BAB) the mashith is the death of the self through the perversions of the maskit/imagination

 The seven headed beast of the Apocalypse represents the perversion of the reflected Seven Spirits of G_d (represented by the 7 branched menorah of the Temple @ godasagardener.com/2011/02/01/almond-tree-in-the-tabernacle: The Spirit of G_d [godliness/piety], Wisdom, etc., Isaiah ) by the imagination, that turn against the sinner at the approach of death

 At July 08, 2015, Anonymous Anonymous said... 
the following may not transpose to this format

 A/S beyond, beyond

 ____________________ ____________________

 K 1 beyond and manifest ____________________ ____________________ // C2 [Z/H] // ____________________ ____________________

 ^ ^ ^ ____________________ ____________________ // H // ____________________ ____________________

 T5 (5) etc… ____________________ ____________________ v I I ____________________ ____________________ C(9)6 > (7)C6 ____________________ ____________________ I I ____________________ ____________________ N(2)8 > (4)N8 ____________________ ____________________ I I ^ ____________________ ____________________ C2 [Z/H] B3 [D/P] MIM4 [D/P] B3 C2 [Z/H] ____________________ ____________________ I I ____________________ ____________________ G(6)7 >D04 (8)G7 ____________________ ____________________ I I ____________________ ____________________ H(3)9 > (1)H9 ____________________ ____________________ I I v ____________________ ____________________ Y5;10 ____________________ ____________________ // H ____________________ ____________________ v v v ____________________ ____________________ // C2 [Z/H] /// upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Blason_ville_fr_Toulouse_(Haute-Garonne).svg // Not gibberish - if it correctly transposed // from Ain Soph to the Kingdom (as evidenced in men of goodwill on Earth)… // The enneag. placement was there for a Sufi discussion and I chose to leave it as is // The circles of creation // Kether, Binah etc. containing the lightning strike // In the Greek sense (Plotinus the best reference) // the greater spheres reflect the qualities of Zeus/Hera Demeter/Poseidon Hera/Hades / they can be thought of as our sense perceptions - which time Cronos consumes // Apollyon and Artemis part of the principalities and powers (slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.) eclipse and sun… and so on //

 At July 09, 2015, Blogger Jack H said... 
I find your several comments to be indecipherable. We can get very much into our own particular studies, and fail to take the extra steps to avoid over-specifics and jargon. Communication must start with an attempt to be accessible. Thank you for your interest, though, and feel free...

At July 16, 2015, Anonymous Anonymous said... 
A question: // What do you mean by implying that this Tersin / Toisson fellow was Arthur (or Uther?) // His blazon was three lambs … how does this relate to the Pendragon? // www.theoi.com/Ther/DrakonKholkikos.html // … // Gettius Ursulus de Chapteuil // de Fay de Chapteuil

 At July 17, 2015, Blogger Jack H said... 
Now, Anonymous, you've left nearly 50 comments on this particular post, which seem in no way to be correlated to anything here. There appears to be much of interest in what you're leaving, and very much that is incomprehensible in its present form and lack of identifiable antecedent. Take the above comment/question for example. Nowhere in HEAVENS do I mention Tersin or Pendragon. Are your comments simply random? If they're meant to footnote some specific datum I've noted, I need a context for it to make sense. I've written millions of words, and do not remember every detail.

 At July 21, 2015, Anonymous Anonymous said... 
We can get very much into our own particular studies, and fail to take the extra steps to avoid over-specifics and jargon. Communication must start with an attempt to be accessible. // ~ // tumblr.com/search/william%20of%20gellone

[This is the picture that shows up from that address.]

 At July 21, 2015, Anonymous Anonymous said... 
William has arrived at Aigniennes. He entered the gate disturbed and lost in thought, often calling on the name of the true Father of Jesus. The porter was in a panic: “God, Father in heaven above,” he said, “what demon did this man come from? I’ve never seen a man of such stature, so ill-fashioned, so big, and so stoutly-built. Look at those shoulders, those arms and that body! I believe he's come from the depths of hell or from master Beelzebub. I wish he was in the depths of Montagu! - he would never come in here again. Holy Mary, where was such a man born?” // A few remained among the vaults, saying to each other, “We are lost! Antichrist has come among us! We will be destroyed by him.” // When the count saw this happen, and that all the monks fled at the sight of him, “God in Heaven!” said William, “What the devil have these monks seen? In my opinion they have gone out of their senses. May they all be hanged!” And then he realised what he had said, and went on: “God, what have I said? I am deceived! God, I have sinned, I want to be a monk, but my brothers have sent me out of my senses.” ... // Count William began to get angry: “God, Father who will judge the world,” he said, “I thought that I would put myself right with you and acquit myself of my mortal sins, but these people are giving me a lot of trouble. // They don’t want to approach me. But, by St Peter, it won’t do them any good! I will be a monk, no matter who gets upset about it; and I will serve and exalt the holy monks...” Then the lord began to weep. “God, Father,” he said, “have pity on me!” // cont.at Cardiff University; School of History, Archaeology and Religion // How William became a monk. cf.ac.uk/hisar/people/hn/MilitaryOrders/MILORDOCS2.htm /

At July 21, 2015, Blogger Jack H said... 
Dear Anonymous -- The above is in no way an improvement in your communication attempts. I apprehend your allegorical intent, but gnomic utterances and tertiary allusions hardly represent a striving toward accessibility. I don't publish the very much vast majority of your comments because I do not think they represent at actual attempt at responsive communication. You have intimated that some of your previous internet correspondences were problematic. I'm a disinterested observer, and I assure you that to some large degree the responsibility will be your own. I've used the words 'unintelligible' and 'incomprehensible' regarding your comments. You seem to know they arrive in a garbled form -- why send them then? Take the trouble to format them, or deliberately be an imposition upon your correspondent. You must surely know this. If you are not capable of change, no worries. Be at peace.

[The following quotes from one of my 'Psychology of Jesus' 

posts.  By "provenance"  is meant "context".]

 At July 29, 2015, Anonymous Anonymous said... 
provenance. // . // "Got it? It’s Jesus who went to a distant land to be made king. See? " // I 'see' … something entirely different. Had I presented a personal opinion, well, what is that? Whether or not one is articulate was never the point. An opinion is only worth as much as the facts it is based on… should someone agree with conceptions couched in the language of scintillating intellect, it is little more than flattery if the giver has failed to examine the facts. // In which case common courtesy requires material evidence be generously provided, so rather than occupy myself casting about for opinions to ballast a floundering theory I have done as much // in return my vision has been beset with images of foodstuffs of dubious providence and caloric content and enough vehicular pastiches to garnish a junkyard // (the occasional mountain range an excepted and welcome relief ) /

At July 31, 2015, Blogger Jack H said... 
The above seems to be an attempt at disrespect. Comments here are a privilege not a right. These posts are honest with some humor. The appropriate response is appreciation, or silence.

=============

And there was some response, which I lost while moving it here.  I regret that, because the use of the word "onerous" was unique -- my work is somehow "onerous" ... what is meant isn't clear -- he's used a big-sounding word with some sort of negative association and he thinks that's a riposte. His word usage is so stilted that I wondered if English was his native language; now I think he's just trying to sound smart.  (Son, drop the thesaurus and read good writers -- the Penguin translation of Montaigne would be a fine start.)  The lost last comment was a promise to be silent, henceforth, with some further attempt at being insulting, in parentheses.

Well.  My correspondent is either a quite socially backward young male, or a mentally ill adult male.   Because of the use of words bigger than he actually knows, like 'providence', I'm going with young.  I hope so, anyway, because social skills can be learned.

Dear Anonymous:  Yes, it's best that you don't leave any more comments.  I scan them for relevance, coherence, and honest intention, but you've seen what I think about the matter.  No insult meant, and I want to be gentle, but your communication skills are truly horrid.  Less cut and paste, more framing.  Because right now you give a sort of Ted Kaczynski impression -- whirling around in your own isolated imagination, an imbalanced flywheel tearing itself apart.  

Maybe I'm wrong, but please feel no need to correct me.  

If you have a copy of that last comment, though, I'd like to add it here ... it was precious.  

Again, I'm not trying to be unkind.  The truth just feels that way.  Again, not unkind.

Best,

J

*Babylon

YT

Years ago when I delved into biblical prophesy I puzzled as to where the United States might be, in the contest of such great forces as Gog and the Sons of the East.  Were we perhaps the People of the Islands of the Sea?  How could such a great and godly thing as America go unremarked by the good prophets?

Now I think that we are counted as among the mere nations, no special country set apart, no people coupled in amity with Israel. How could this be?  From such a sacred and special beginning, like a city on a hill, like a family called out of the nations, like a child of the king, are we now no more than a wastrel living among pigs?

It may be, I think now, that we were never anything more than that -- a nation blessed as nations sometimes are, but with no special blessing, only of being used for a certain purpose.  A golden chamber pot is in reality no more noble than one of clay.

Admittedly, this is a dark view, and disrespectful of the highest aspirations of our history.  If however our American dream is just a fantasy, a national myth such as  every nation has, different only in our idealism -- well, there is much to be said for a myth that is an ambition, but we must know reality for what it is.  I say we must, even if reality makes us unhappy.  That's my own version of idealism: there are things more important than happiness.

There were true prophets who were not godly.  Balaam, for example.  More to the point, there were great national powers that were used for a time as an instrument of God's will, but which were condemned.  Assyrian Ninevah comes to mind, as we know it from Jonah.  More telling is Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.  What could be more filthy than Babylon?  Who could be more depraved than its king?  Yet Nebuchadnezzar was known by and himself knew God.

Is this it?  That is where we fall?  Are we Babylon, one of the many Babylons?    It may be that our increasingly erotic embrace of the mores of paganism is reversible, as a prodigal may repent and wipe off the pig shit that covers him.  The news of the day may somehow be a footnote and not a theme of our history.  Indeed, perhaps.  I don't wish to be direful, as I was in my formative years.  Optimism, pessimism, realism -- you know the studies, and who is happy.  It must be a temperament thing.  I crave reality.   Given almost every lesson of history, what does it take to reverse a civilizational trend?  Revolution, catastrophic invasion, plague, decades of famine -- you see the magnitude.  Nothing like anything in the brief history of the nation.  It's not a law of history. It's just the pattern.

 So I'm not optimistic.

The answer of course is to stop caring about idealism and work for what is attainable.  What is left for us to fight for?  It's coming as sure as abortion and gay marriage: churches required to officiate over such unions.  Unthinkable you say?  The Leftist movement against true free speech proves otherwise.  We no longer live under a Constitution with the rule of law.  Sorry, we just don't.  Law is whatever current and progressive opinion would have it to be.  If you deny it, I refer you to a June 26 Supreme Court ruling.

This is why I now come down firmly where I do.  We can't push back, and holding actions have inevitably, universally failed.  Over time, we lose, always, always.  Every victory was in battle, not in war.  Proof?  You actually ask for proof?  This is your proof: America wills that it shall never win a war.  Witness all the wars we have won, then lost.  The last one we didn't lose in this way was re Korea, and, my sweet naive friend, we will, will, will lose that one as well.  It's what we do.

This is why I have for so long been silent in these pages.  I don't want to be pessimistic, a negative voice, disloyal to what I have thought to be true.  All we have is faith, in this case a sort of hope that things are different than they seem according to the evidence.  Puts me in a bind.  So I've been silent.

Is it worth it?  To speak up?


J

*Supremacy, Sodomy and Slavery

YT

I have deeply wished to avoid this.  It's too much.  I find myself driven to it.  Therefore:

Last week the Supreme Court created a new right, a new institution, a new Constitution and a new country.  Apparently we, we, were asleep.  It turns out that we are the unworthy servant, given a talent which we buried; while the other side is the more worthy, the good and faithful servant to its cause, and will receive its rich reward now, regardless of what is to come.  Rather than be bold and resolute and fearless and energetic in our cause, we retreated into civility and adherence to rules and decorum, while they were brazen, fierce and successful.

Years ago for some reason in my disparate readings in history I came upon the tale of some Sheikh or Pasha or Emir who had purchased a pretty blue-eyed slaveboy and wished as was the custom to enjoy some sodomy. A Western traveler inquired of the potentate how such an insertion might be achieved, against a determinedly resistant sphincter.  Steady pounding, was the reply -- no resolve is sufficient to resist constant pressure upon such a minor muscle, designed as it is to keep things in, not out.  Test it for yourself.

I now believe it is inevitable that, given generational time, the Left will always prevail.  Erosion is a law of nature.  Attrition is the greatest general.  Degeneration is the rule of civilizations.  Entropy is universal.

Last week issued the irrefutable affirmation of the Supreme Court's supremacy, and of course at first as is my way I felt nothing.  Profound stillness, as the Spirit upon the Deep.  But I slipped the hold I have on myself and allowed emotion and judgment in, and concluded that this was truly the end of America, the end of American exceptionalism.  We are now just another country.  This fact brought only a dull depression, nothing profound, which surprised me.  About a day later I realized that my timing was wrong.  We stopped being America over forty years ago, with Roe v Wade.

Life is far more important than the institution of marriage.  We allowed the Supreme Court to well and truly assert its supremacy with that power grab, that plunge into insanity, where life itself is defined as not meaningful, given a woman's right to privacy.  As if life were not, above any other consideration, public.  Ah well, no matter.  How much less, the meaning of marriage than the meaning of life.  And conservatives are polite and will never impose, the New Testament commandment to be bold notwithstanding.  As it is the scorpion's nature to sting, it is ours to be silent and comply.

As I say, there is too much to say.  How did this perversion creep into our system?  It was inserted, like a penis, by John Marshall with his invention of Judicial Review, whereby the Court upon a merest majority may nullify any law.  Which is a good idea, in principle, but it had the effect of making the smallest, least, most inconsequential branch of our Federal system into the most powerful.  This is undeniably a profound perversion -- a check without a balance.  What business had the court to say a law is unconstitutional?  The job was to adjudicate cases under the law, not over it.  If the court deemed a law unconstitutional, would not the proper recourse have been to refer the matter back to Congress?  Breathtaking in its audacity.

Allow me to state the obvious: the Supreme Court is supreme only over our Judicial system.  It is not supreme over the Constitution, nor the Legislative nor the Executive Branch.  The President is the supreme Executive, and the two houses of Congress are the supreme Legislators.  See how that works?  No one else ever seems to have noticed this before.  There are three Supremacies, the least of which is the Court.  Andrew Jackson was a disaster and wrong about almost everything.  He was right about the Court, in his putative statement, that the Court had made its decision, now let it enforce it.  No government official takes the oath of office to support and uphold the Constitution as the Supreme Court asserts it to be -- rather, it is one's own conscience and intellect that must dictate conduct.  This very easy fact is made somehow impossible to grasp.

Precedent and custom have made this essential to be nugatory.  What remedy?  A movement  on our part for a constitutional amendment?  -- to repudiate the specific of gay so-called marriage? -- or to forbid the Supreme Court from making law and inventing so-called rights?  A hopeless cause.  Can't unring a bell, in any case.  The gays have invented a new thing, destroyed an old one.  It hath made  me mad.  We shall have no more marriage.

But here's the thing.  We cannot have judges dictating the course of our civilization.  We can't have that.  True, some three-fourths of the states had gay marriage, prior to the impositional diktat of the Supremes, but that was largely because state judges had struck down state bans on gay marriage.  See how that worked?  Now it's national.  All from judges.  So much for the fantasy of democracy.  We were fools ever to use the word.

How then shall we rein in our overlords, this rampant hyper-minority, this quintumvirate, this gang of five?  Well, simply, by each of the two now-subservient Branches of government, Executive and Legislative, asserting a right of Review over the Courts.  See the symmetry of it?  So elegant.  Marshall invented the idea, and it was a good one.  Laws need to be checked for Constitutionality, and the Supreme Court is the correct body to provide that balance.  In the same way, the Court needs to be checked.  The President checks Congress via his power of veto.  Congress checks the Executive via its control of the budget (ahem, we must suppose it to be so). Where, where, where is the check on the Court?  Mere nomination and consent is an initial step, but some of us remember how stealth-candidate Soutor  came to the bench -- approved as a conservative and manifesting as a liberal.  Initial steps alone are insufficient.

Impeachment is a theory, but it addresses wrongdoing, not incompetence or insanity.  While a justice, John Rutledge tried several times in several rivers to drown himself -- he was "much deranged" and  subject to "mad frolicks".  Henry Baldwin was confined to an asylum in his third year with "incurable lunacy".  He remained a member of the Supreme Court for another eleven years.  Nathan Clifford was described by a fellow justice as "a babbling idiot" -- not an invective, but a diagnosis; he refused to resign and died on the court.  Ward Hunt refused to resign because he wanted the penison -- he was paralyzed and could not speak; Congress voted him a pension to get him gone.  Frank Murphy bought illegal drugs from his pusher twice daily.

Therefore, Congress must assert its power to nullify (a word fraught with history) odious decisions of the Court -- as, say, Dred Scott or Plessy v Ferguson.  There was no recourse, no remedy for such perversions, save Civil War and civil disobedience unto martyrdom.  There must be some more political answer, or we are a people not free but subservient. As indeed we are, but should not be.   Likewise, the President must assert his ethical and sworn duty to uphold the Constitution as he understands it.

There are several means of amending the Constitution, but the only one that's succeeded is where two-thirds of both the House and the Senate agree to send a proposal to the state legislatures, three-fourths of which agree to make it law.  A high standard.  John Marshall did not adhere to such rigor, and I suggest and propose that no one else need do so. We need not amend the Constitution to curb the abuse.

Congress shall assert its duty, as an element of its legislative mandate, upon a quorum vote of two-thirds (or three-fourths) of both Houses, to reverse a decision of the Supreme Court which Congress deems to be obnoxious ... to a reasonable interpretation of the historical understanding blah blah blah.

Likewise, the President, as the chief law-enforcement officer of the land, has the positive duty to enforce laws enacted by Congress, and no duty to enforce laws enacted by Judges -- which in any event is an impossibility.  Because of the deeply political nature of the office, the conduct of the President will be checked by popular opinion, party politics and imminent elections.
.
Will this happen?  Yes, because my blog is a National Power and I myself am a force to be reckoned with.


J

The Psychology of Jesus: I

See HERE.