Skip to main content

Why does coffee always get the blame? - Seton

+
JMJ

My wife sent me a link to this article and I think it is too good to not share.  There is truth as well as humour in these lines.  I think I will add a 'humour' label even though Mr. Clark does seem to be in earnest!

P^3

Source: Seton Magazine - John Clark





Why Does Coffee Always Get the Blame?

Has anyone else noticed that coffee has become the financial “fall guy” lately? We live in an age of bailouts, zombie banks, troubled assets, and more troubled liabilities, yet coffee is often pointed to as the real financial problem. Here’s what I mean.


Have you been in a conversation expressing your frustration that you can’t afford something, and someone chimes in with a tidbit of advice like this:
Adopting a sarcastic tone:
“Well, if you’d just stop drinking your vanilla lattes every morning, then maybe you could afford that new house/used car/vacation to Mongolia.”
As if.
2014-05 Gospel Time  Trekkers
As if the only thing that stood between the good life and me were vanilla lattes. Did I miss something, or is a demitasse a little more expensive for others than it is for me? We’re talking about a few dollars a day, right?
Wouldn’t the college tuitions, orthodontics, violins, ballet classes, and homeschooling books overturn my financial applecart long before the espresso? Is frothy coffee really going to be the thing that makes or breaks me?
I can see it now…
Sometime in the future, a friend comes over to my house, looks around and says: “John, how did you and Lisa afford such a beautiful house?”
“Well, Scott, I didn’t think we could do it, but we gave up lattes for twelve-hundred-and-seventy-five-years, and we were able to make a down payment. Of course, there has been a downside: we’ve been dozing off the entire time because of the lack of caffeine.”
I understand that a few dollars here and a few dollars there helps you plan for the future. I believe in planning for the future too, but I also believe in planning for consciousness later in the day. Diminished states of cognizance seem somehow rude at times. For instance, people start to wonder if you are truly engaged in a dialogue if you begin snoring during it.
Especially if it’s in the middle of a speech.
Especially if you are the speaker.
(If you’ve been reading my column for a while now and you know my backstory, you might be asking why I don’t get enough sleep at night; after all, my youngest child is almost five years old. Fair question. Here’s the answer: when your children are little, their crying keeps you awake. When they become teenagers, your crying keeps you awake. And lest you think otherwise, for the record, I have nine of the greatest and most wonderful children in the world. But, however your children are doing in life, worrying about them—along with the concomitant daytime narcolepsy—is an understandable reaction. Hence, the need for coffee.)
Implicit in the anti-coffee comments like the one above is the idea that coffee is a needless luxury. Not only do I disagree with that as an economist (coffee clearly falls under “need” as opposed to “want”), I disagree from the perspective of theology. Some time ago, I remember Lisa telling me about discalced orders who start their day with a bowl of java. In other words, there are religious orders of people who don’t have shoes—but do have coffee.
There is a lot we can learn from our religious brothers and sisters: namely, to paraphrase St. Teresa of Avila, there is a time for fasting and a time for froth.
Or, to put it another way: live a little.
Drink the latte.

Read more at http://www.setonmagazine.com/dad/john-clark/coffee-always-get-blame#lOpvy72hKuM5a07C.99

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sedevacantism and Heresy

+ JMJ I've observed three core reactions during this crisis of the Catholic Church. The Pope can't be wrong, therefore this is the New Springtime The Pope is infallible in certain conditions and there is a problem with many things that have been said, done and written, during and after the Second Vatican Council (even in the Council doc). The Pope can't be wrong, this stuff is wrong, therefore he isn't Pope. Of course there are a spectrum of responses in between, but these are the key elements. The 1st group holds the words of the Pope et al as impeccable. Here, let me get you a Koran to kiss... The 3rd group holds that they've all been heretics and lost their office.  There is also a spectrum within this group.   One answer is that they are very poor judges of heresy.  The link below provides some reasoned thought that, I'm happy to say, is completely consistent with Church Teaching. Canon law blog: Its not impossible just very diff...

What does it mean "I'm a Traditional Catholic"?

+ JMJ I was visiting with a friend the other day when he said: "I'm a traditionalist". This surprised me because, while I could imagine him saying he was a "conservative or faithful Catholic", I didn't really think that the "traditionalist" label would stick. This got me to to thinking about what it means, or should mean when a person shakes you hand and says: "Hi, I'm a Traditional Catholic".

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...

Schism

There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...