New Computer, ME incompatable, XP is only upgrade

[Chronus]

In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade require
windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it started without
windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I installed (or at least
tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of compatable drivers. Restart
it and it comes up without the CD (actually DVD) drive. Yes the drive works,
its the one Windows ME was installed from. Now I have an extremely limited
Windows ME with no way to access the XP professional disk. Anyone know of a
work around?

 

[John John]

You don't need to have a previous Windows version installed to install
Windows XP with an upgrade cd. All you need is to supply proof that you
have a previous version when asked. When you start the install with the
XP upgrade cd it will scan the drive for an installation to upgrade, if
it finds no previous Windows version to upgrade it will tell you so and
ask that you insert the cd of a qualifying Windows version in the drive.
When the setup program is satisfied that you own a qualifying Windows
version it will proceed to install Windows XP cleanly.

John

Chronus wrote:

> In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade require
> windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it started without
> windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I installed (or at least
> tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of compatable drivers. Restart
> it and it comes up without the CD (actually DVD) drive. Yes the drive works,
> its the one Windows ME was installed from. Now I have an extremely limited
> Windows ME with no way to access the XP professional disk. Anyone know of a
> work around?

 

[Chronus]

Actually you do need a previous version installed. XP professional upgrade
CDs are not bootable. Also, the setup.exe on the XP professional upgrade CD
only runs under windows.

"John John" wrote:

> You don't need to have a previous Windows version installed to install
> Windows XP with an upgrade cd. All you need is to supply proof that you
> have a previous version when asked. When you start the install with the
> XP upgrade cd it will scan the drive for an installation to upgrade, if
> it finds no previous Windows version to upgrade it will tell you so and
> ask that you insert the cd of a qualifying Windows version in the drive.
> When the setup program is satisfied that you own a qualifying Windows
> version it will proceed to install Windows XP cleanly.
>
> John
>
> Chronus wrote:
>
> > In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade require
> > windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it started without
> > windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I installed (or at least
> > tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of compatable drivers. Restart
> > it and it comes up without the CD (actually DVD) drive. Yes the drive works,
> > its the one Windows ME was installed from. Now I have an extremely limited
> > Windows ME with no way to access the XP professional disk. Anyone know of a
> > work around?
>

 

[John John]

Where on Earth did you get that idea? Go in the BIOS and set the
computer to boot to the CD first then stick the XP upgrade cd in the
drive and boot the computer with it.

How to install or upgrade to Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316941

John

Chronus wrote:

> Actually you do need a previous version installed. XP professional upgrade
> CDs are not bootable. Also, the setup.exe on the XP professional upgrade CD
> only runs under windows.
>
> "John John" wrote:
>
>
>>You don't need to have a previous Windows version installed to install
>>Windows XP with an upgrade cd. All you need is to supply proof that you
>>have a previous version when asked. When you start the install with the
>>XP upgrade cd it will scan the drive for an installation to upgrade, if
>>it finds no previous Windows version to upgrade it will tell you so and
>>ask that you insert the cd of a qualifying Windows version in the drive.
>> When the setup program is satisfied that you own a qualifying Windows
>>version it will proceed to install Windows XP cleanly.
>>
>>John
>>
>>Chronus wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade require
>>>windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it started without
>>>windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I installed (or at least
>>>tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of compatable drivers. Restart
>>>it and it comes up without the CD (actually DVD) drive. Yes the drive works,
>>>its the one Windows ME was installed from. Now I have an extremely limited
>>>Windows ME with no way to access the XP professional disk. Anyone know of a
>>>work around?
>>

 

[N. Miller]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 14:35:01 -0800, Chronus wrote:

> In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade require
> windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it started without
> windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I installed (or at least
> tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of compatable drivers. Restart
> it and it comes up without the CD (actually DVD) drive. Yes the drive works,
> its the one Windows ME was installed from. Now I have an extremely limited
> Windows ME with no way to access the XP professional disk. Anyone know of a
> work around?

If you did not already have Windows ME installed on the new computer, you
should not have bought the upgrade version of Windows XP. If you have an
older computer with Windows ME on it, and it is an OEM install, your upgrade
version of Windows XP would only go on that computer unless the upgrade CD
is bootable. However, I don't know if you could get away with using the key
on the older, OEM computer, since Microsoft intends that you use one copy of
their OS per computer i.e., you couldn't keep running the computer with the
OEM Windows ME *and*, simultaneously, run the new computer with the upgrade
version of Windows XP tied to the older Windows ME. That would count as two
computers, and, for the new computer, you would need a full version of
Windows XP.

It is all about profit Microsoft intends for you to buy a new version of
their OS for a new computer. Only only get to upgrade if there is already a
qualifying version of Windows installed on it.

--
Norman
~Shine, bright morning light,
~now in the air the spring is coming.
~Sweet, blowing wind,
~singing down the hills and valleys.

 

[Eric]

That sounds most likely to me. Most of our computers here came with the
hard drive as the primary boot device. Most people don't know how to get to
their BIOS and it is sometimes difficult. Consult the manual, but sometimes
you have to press DELete on startup, usually F2, and sometimes you only have
a fraction of a second in which to press it. If you have a bootable CD in
the drive with the hard drive set as first boot device it will tell you no
bootable drive found.

"John John" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:u7HKVoNUIHA.476@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> Where on Earth did you get that idea? Go in the BIOS and set the computer
> to boot to the CD first then stick the XP upgrade cd in the drive and boot
> the computer with it.
>
> How to install or upgrade to Windows XP
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316941
>
> John
>
> Chronus wrote:
>
>> Actually you do need a previous version installed. XP professional
>> upgrade CDs are not bootable. Also, the setup.exe on the XP professional
>> upgrade CD only runs under windows. "John John" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You don't need to have a previous Windows version installed to install
>>>Windows XP with an upgrade cd. All you need is to supply proof that you
>>>have a previous version when asked. When you start the install with the
>>>XP upgrade cd it will scan the drive for an installation to upgrade, if
>>>it finds no previous Windows version to upgrade it will tell you so and
>>>ask that you insert the cd of a qualifying Windows version in the drive.
>>>When the setup program is satisfied that you own a qualifying Windows
>>>version it will proceed to install Windows XP cleanly.
>>>
>>>John
>>>
>>>Chronus wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade
>>>>require windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it
>>>>started without windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I
>>>>installed (or at least tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of
>>>>compatable drivers. Restart it and it comes up without the CD (actually
>>>>DVD) drive. Yes the drive works, its the one Windows ME was installed
>>>>from. Now I have an extremely limited Windows ME with no way to access
>>>>the XP professional disk. Anyone know of a work around?
>>>

 

[Bruce Nelson]

Norman,
If I replace the boot harddrive on my computer, I expect to be able to
install either the operating system that was on the old drive, or install an
upgraded o/s.

I see replacing an old computer with a newer (& better?) as being the same
thing. There is nothing in the license agreement that I have noticed that
requires me to purchase a full license with every harddrive - only that I do
not use both the old o/s and the upgrade.

Bruce Nelson


"N. Miller" <anonymous@msnews.aosake.net> wrote in message
news:9qf5zmc16s0f.dlg@msnews.aosake.net...
> On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 14:35:01 -0800, Chronus wrote:
>
>> In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade require
>> windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it started
>> without
>> windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I installed (or at least
>> tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of compatable drivers.
>> Restart
>> it and it comes up without the CD (actually DVD) drive. Yes the drive
>> works,
>> its the one Windows ME was installed from. Now I have an extremely
>> limited
>> Windows ME with no way to access the XP professional disk. Anyone know
>> of a
>> work around?
>
> If you did not already have Windows ME installed on the new computer, you
> should not have bought the upgrade version of Windows XP. If you have an
> older computer with Windows ME on it, and it is an OEM install, your
> upgrade
> version of Windows XP would only go on that computer unless the upgrade
> CD
> is bootable. However, I don't know if you could get away with using the
> key
> on the older, OEM computer, since Microsoft intends that you use one copy
> of
> their OS per computer i.e., you couldn't keep running the computer with
> the
> OEM Windows ME *and*, simultaneously, run the new computer with the
> upgrade
> version of Windows XP tied to the older Windows ME. That would count as
> two
> computers, and, for the new computer, you would need a full version of
> Windows XP.
>
> It is all about profit Microsoft intends for you to buy a new version of
> their OS for a new computer. Only only get to upgrade if there is already
> a
> qualifying version of Windows installed on it.
>
> --
> Norman
> ~Shine, bright morning light,
> ~now in the air the spring is coming.
> ~Sweet, blowing wind,
> ~singing down the hills and valleys.

 

[N. Miller]

On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:27:10 -0500, Bruce Nelson wrote:

> "N. Miller" <anonymous@msnews.aosake.net> wrote in message
> news:9qf5zmc16s0f.dlg@msnews.aosake.net...

>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 14:35:01 -0800, Chronus wrote:

>>> In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade require
>>> windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it started without
>>> windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I installed (or at least
>>> tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of compatable drivers.
>>> Restart it and it comes up without the CD (actually DVD) drive. Yes the
>>> drive works, its the one Windows ME was installed from. Now I have an
>>> extremely limited Windows ME with no way to access the XP professional
>>> disk. Anyone know of a work around?

>> If you did not already have Windows ME installed on the new computer, you
>> should not have bought the upgrade version of Windows XP. If you have an
>> older computer with Windows ME on it, and it is an OEM install, your
>> upgrade version of Windows XP would only go on that computer unless the
>> upgrade CD is bootable. However, I don't know if you could get away with
>> using the key on the older, OEM computer, since Microsoft intends that you
>> use one copy of their OS per computer i.e., you couldn't keep running the
>> computer with the OEM Windows ME *and*, simultaneously, run the new computer
>> with the upgrade version of Windows XP tied to the older Windows ME. That
>> would count as two computers, and, for the new computer, you would need a
>> full version of Windows XP.
>>
>> It is all about profit Microsoft intends for you to buy a new version of
>> their OS for a new computer. Only only get to upgrade if there is already
>> a qualifying version of Windows installed on it.

> If I replace the boot harddrive on my computer, I expect to be able to
> install either the operating system that was on the old drive, or install an
> upgraded o/s.

AFAIK, that is not a problem. I have done that myself. But the upgrade is
tied to the OEM OS, and the OEM OS is tied to the computer it was installed
on.

> I see replacing an old computer with a newer (& better?) as being the same
> thing.

Replacing the old computer with a newer computer is most definitely not the
same thing as replacing the old HDD on that old computer with a new HDD.

> There is nothing in the license agreement that I have noticed that requires
> me to purchase a full license with every harddrive - only that I do
> not use both the old o/s and the upgrade.

There is nothing against replacing the old HDD with a new HDD. You can
transfer the OS from the old HDD to the new HDD *in the same old computer*.
You can't transfer the OS from the old computer to the new computer, and you
need a qualifying OS to use the upgrade product.

--
Norman
~Shine, bright morning light,
~now in the air the spring is coming.
~Sweet, blowing wind,
~singing down the hills and valleys.

 

[Bob]

On Jan 8, 9:35 pm, "N. Miller" <anonym...@msnews.aosake.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:27:10 -0500, Bruce Nelson wrote:
> > "N. Miller" <anonym...@msnews.aosake.net> wrote in message
> >news:9qf5zmc16s0f.dlg@msnews.aosake.net...
> >> On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 14:35:01 -0800, Chronus wrote:
> >>> In Microsofts great wisdom, they made the XP professional upgrade require
> >>> windows already be installed. I have a new computer so it started without
> >>> windows. Not knowing a way around the problem, I installed (or at least
> >>> tried to) Windows ME. It halts due to a lack of compatable drivers.
> >>> Restart it and it comes up without the CD (actually DVD) drive. Yes the
> >>> drive works, its the one Windows ME was installed from. Now I have an
> >>> extremely limited Windows ME with no way to access the XP professional
> >>> disk. Anyone know of a work around?
> >> If you did not already have Windows ME installed on the new computer, you
> >> should not have bought the upgrade version of Windows XP. If you have an
> >> older computer with Windows ME on it, and it is an OEM install, your
> >> upgrade version of Windows XP would only go on that computer unless the
> >> upgrade CD is bootable. However, I don't know if you could get away with
> >> using the key on the older, OEM computer, since Microsoft intends that you
> >> use one copy of their OS per computer i.e., you couldn't keep running the
> >> computer with the OEM Windows ME *and*, simultaneously, run the new computer
> >> with the upgrade version of Windows XP tied to the older Windows ME. That
> >> would count as two computers, and, for the new computer, you would need a
> >> full version of Windows XP.
>
> >> It is all about profit Microsoft intends for you to buy a new version of
> >> their OS for a new computer. Only only get to upgrade if there is already
> >> a qualifying version of Windows installed on it.
> > If I replace the boot harddrive on my computer, I expect to be able to
> > install either the operating system that was on the old drive, or install an
> > upgraded o/s.
>
> AFAIK, that is not a problem. I have done that myself. But the upgrade is
> tied to the OEM OS, and the OEM OS is tied to the computer it was installed
> on.
>
> > I see replacing an old computer with a newer (& better?) as being the same
> > thing.
>
> Replacing the old computer with a newer computer is most definitely not the
> same thing as replacing the old HDD on that old computer with a new HDD.
>
> > There is nothing in the license agreement that I have noticed that requires
> > me to purchase a full license with every harddrive - only that I do
> > not use both the old o/s and the upgrade.
>
> There is nothing against replacing the old HDD with a new HDD. You can
> transfer the OS from the old HDD to the new HDD *in the same old computer*.
> You can't transfer the OS from the old computer to the new computer, and you
> need a qualifying OS to use the upgrade product.
>
> --
> Norman
> ~Shine, bright morning light,
> ~now in the air the spring is coming.
> ~Sweet, blowing wind,
> ~singing down the hills and valleys.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hmmm. Norman, Seems Microsoft's sweet music is sure making a lot of
sour notes these days.
As I recall, "my system" started as a homebuilt win98SE on a Gigabyte
mob. Then it even dual booted with a fat32 windows NT5 Beta. Then I
upgraded to winME. Worked very well for several years (NOT the win2K
beta - it was useless after it "timed out") Then I upgraded the
motherboard with a later version in the same family - faster CPU,
memory, etc. Almost all the peripeherals remained the same. I put the
solitary winME service pack (I don't think it was actually called a
service pack, just a big update).

And it still runs very good. Even with two NICS on it - one built into
the MOB, one Netgear hanging around since windows5/2000 was running.
Also have some ghost printers, etc. etc. My boots could be faster but
it gets up in about a minute so I'm not complaining. We have a Gold
Standard maintenance philosophy, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
balanced with the voice of experience, "Consistency is the hobgoblin
of small minds".

For several years I was a big fan of Dock-Tray hard-drive
arrangements. I have several drives "on the shelf" that dock with
this system. One of the bigger surprises was the otherday, I put up an
ancient win98se system drive and it ran like a champ (well, I doubt
the printer did because it had an Epson back then and now we use a
Canon Pixma).


To sum up - Seems as though MS has gone to the dogs - Legal Beagles to
be exact. So long as Bill listened to his computer whiz kids it was a
beautiful ride.

 

[John John]

Him after His coming. The two
peoples, Gentile and Jewish, regard Him as their centre.

And yet what man enjoys this renown less? Of thirty-three years, He lives
thirty without appearing. For three years He passes as an impostor the
priests and the chief people reject Him His friends and His nearest
relatives despise Him. Finally, He dies, betrayed by one of His own
disciples, denied by another, and abandoned by all.

What part, then, has He in this renown? Never had man so much renown never
had man more ignominy. All that renown has served only for us, to render us
capable of recognising Him and He had none of it for Himself.

793. The infinite distance between body and mind is a symbol of the
infinitely more infinite distance between mind and charity for charity is
supernatural.

All the glory of greatness has no lustre for people who are in search of
understanding.

The greatness of clever men is invisible to kings, to the rich, to chiefs,
and to all the worldly great.

The greatness of wisdom, which is nothing if not of God, is invisible to the
carnal-minded and to the clever. These are three orders differing in kind.

Great geniuses have their power, their glory, their greatness, their
victory, their lustre, and have no need of worldly greatness, with which
they are not in keeping. They are seen, not by the eye, but by the mind
this is sufficient.

The saints have their power, their glory, their victory, their lustre, and
need no worldly or intellectual greatness, with

 

[Bob]

to self is the beginning of all disorder, in war, in politics, in economy,
and in the particular body of man. The will is therefore depraved.

If the members of natural and civil communities tend towards the weal of the
body, the communities themselves ought to look to another more general body
of which they are members. We ought, therefore, to look to the whole. We
are, therefore, born unjust and depraved.

478. When we want to think of God, is there nothing which turns us away, and
tempts us to think of something else? All this is bad, and is born in us.

479. If there is a God, we must love Him only and not the creatures of a
day. The reasoning of the ungodly in the Book of Wisdom is only based upon
the nonexistence of God. "On that supposition," say they, "let us take
delight in the creatures." That is the worst that can happen. But if there
were a God to love, they would not have come to this conclusion, but to
quite the contrary. And this is the conclusion of the wise: "There is a God
let us therefore not take delight in the creatures."

Therefore all that incites us to attach ourselves to the creatures is bad
since it prevents us from serving God if we know Him, or from seeking Him if
we know Him not. Now we are full of lust. Therefore we are full of evil
therefore we ought to hate ourselves and all that excited us to attach
ourselves to any other object than God only.

480. To make the members happy, they must have one will and submit it to the
body.

481. The examples

 

[Eric]

the truth was only typified in heaven it is revealed.

In the Church it is hidden and recognised by its resemblance to the type.

The type has been made according to the truth, and the truth has been
recognised according to the type.

Saint Paul says himself that people will forbid to marry, and he himself
speaks of it to the Corinthians in a way which is a snare. For if a prophet
had said the one, and Saint Paul had then said the other, he would have been
accused.

674. Typical.--"Do all things according to the pattern which has been shown
thee on the mount." On which Saint Paul says that the Jews have shadowed
forth heavenly things.

675.... And yet this Covenant, made to blind some and enlighten others,
indicated in those very persons, whom it blinded, the truth which should be
recognised by others. For the visible blessings which they received from God
were so great and so divine that He indeed appeared able to give them those
that are invisible and a Messiah.

For nature is an image of Grace, and visible miracles are images of the
invisible. Ut sciatis... tibi dico: Surge.127

Isaiah says that Redemption will be as the passage of the Red Sea.

God has, then, shown by the deliverance from Egypt, and from the sea, by the
defeat of kings, by the manna, by the whole genealogy of Abraham, that He
was able to save, to send down bread from heaven, etc. so that the people
hostile to Him are the type and the representation of the very Messiah whom
they know not, etc.

He has, then, taught us at last that all these things were only types and
what is "true freedom," a "true Israelite," "true circumcision," "true bread
from heaven," etc.

In these promises each one finds what he has most at heart, temporal
benefits or spiritual, God or the creatures but with this difference, that
those who therein seek the c

 

[N. Miller]

this faith that God Himself puts into the heart, of
which the proof is often the instrument, fides ex auditu34 but this faith
is in the heart, and makes us not say scio, but credo.35

249. It is superstition to put one's hope in formalities but it is pride to
be unwilling to submit to them.

250. The external must be joined to the internal to obtain anything from
God, that is to say, we must kneel, pray with the lips, etc., in order that
proud man, who would not submit himself to God, may be now subject to the
creature. To expect help from these externals is superstition to refuse to
join them to the internal is pride.

251. Other religions, as the pagan, are more popular, for they consist in
externals. But they are not for educated people. A purely intellectual
religion would be more suited to the learned, but it would be of no use to
the common people. The Christian religion alone is adapted to all, being
composed of externals and internals. It raises the common people to the
internal, and humbles the proud to the external it is not perfect without
the two, for the people must understand the spirit of the letter, and the
learned must submit their spirit to the letter.

252. For we must not misunderstand ourselves we are as much automatic as
intellectual and hence it comes that the instrument by which conviction is
attained is not demonstrated alone. How few things are demonstrated! Proofs
only convince the mind. Custom is the source of our strongest and most
believed proofs. It bends the automaton, which persuades the mind without
its thinking about the

 

[Bruce Nelson]

in a kind of beatific vision of God and seemed
to have, as I thought, as immediate an intercourse with Him, as a child
with a father. At the same time, she appeared most remote from any high
thought of herself, and of her own sufficiency but was like a little
child, and expressed a great desire to be instructed, telling me that
she longed very often to come to me for instruction, and wanted to live
at my house, that I might tell her what was her duty.

She often expressed a sense of the glory of God appearing in the trees,
the growth of the fields, and other works of God's hands. She told her
sister who lived near the heart of the town, that she once thought it a
pleasant thing to live in the middle of the town, but now, says she, I
think it much more pleasant to sit and see the wind blowing the trees,
and to behold in the country what God has made. She had sometimes the
powerful breathings of the Spirit of God on her soul, while reading the
Scripture and would express her sense of the certain truth and divinity
thereof. She sometimes would appear with a pleasant smile on her
countenance and once, when her sister took notice of it, and asked why
she smiled, she replied, I am brim-full of a sweet feeling within. She
often used to express how good and sweet it was to lie low before God,
and the lower (says she) the better! and that it was pleasant to think
of lying in the dust, all the days of her life, m

 

[Chronus]

conversation? We see
also that in these days tribes took particular care to preserve their
genealogies.

627. I believe that Joshua was the first of God's people to have this name,
as Jesus Christ was the last of God's people.

628. Antiquity of the Jews.--What a difference there is between one book and
another! I am not astonished that the Greeks made the Iliad, nor the
Egyptians and the Chinese their histories.

We have only to see how this originates. These fabulous historians are not
contemporaneous with the facts about which they write. Homer composes a
romance, which he gives out as such, and which is received as such for
nobody doubted that Troy and Agamemnon no more existed than did the golden
apple. Accordingly, he did not think of making a history, but solely a book
to amuse he is the only writer of his time the beauty of the work has made
it last, every one learns it and talks of it, it is necessary to know it,
and each one knows it by heart. Four hundred years afterwards the witnesses
of these facts are no longer alive, no one knows of his own knowledge if it
be a fable or a history one has only learnt it from his ancestors, and this
can pass for truth.

Every history which is not contemporaneous, as the books of the Sibyls and
Trismegistus, and so many others which have been believed by the world, are
false, and found to be false in the course of time. It is not so with
con

 

[N. Miller]

they educe are perfectly clear and natural! This is what Jesus Christ
did, and the Apostles. They broke the seal He rent the veil, and revealed
the spirit. They have taught us through this that the enemies of man are his
passions that the Redeemer would be spiritual, and His reign spiritual
that there would be two advents, one in lowliness to humble the proud, the
other in glory to exalt the humble that Jesus Christ would be both God and
man.

679. Types.--Jesus Christ opened their mind to understand the Scriptures.

Two great revelations are these. (1) All things happened to them in types:
vere Israelitae, vere liberi, true bread from Heaven. (2) A God humbled to
the Cross. It was necessary that Christ should suffer in order to enter into
glory, "that He should destroy death through death." Two advents.

680. Types.--When once this secret is disclosed, it is impossible not to see
it. Let us read the Old Testament in this light, and let us see if the
sacrifices were real if the fatherhood of Abraham

 

[Chronus]

which must indeed be deplored, but from which nothing can be
inferred against the care which God takes of His Church since all these
things are so clearly foretold, and it has been so long since announced that
these temptations would arise from people of this kind so that when we are
well instructed, we see in this rather evidence of the care of God than of
His forgetfulness in regard to us.

890. Tertullian: Nunquam Ecclesia reformabitur.222

891. Heretics, who take advantage of the doctrine of the Jesuits, must be
made to know that it is not that of the Church, and that our divisions do
not separate us from the altar.

892. If in differing we condemned, you would be right. Uniformity without
diversity is useless to others diversity without uniformity is ruinous for
us. The one is harmful outwardly the other inwardly.

893. By showing the truth, we cause it to be believed but by showing the
injustice of ministers, we do not correct it. Our mind is assured by a proof
of falsehood our purse is not made secure by proof of injustice.

894. Those who love the Church lament to see the corruption of morals but
laws at least exist. But these corrupt the laws. The model is damaged.

895. Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction.

896. It is in vain that the Church has established these words, anathemas,
heresies, etc. They are used against her.

897. The servant knoweth not what his lord doeth, for the master tells him
only the act and not the intention. And this is why he often obeys
slavishly, and defeats the intention. But Jesus Christ has told us the
object. And you defeat that object.

898. They cannot have perpetuity, and they seek unive

 

[John John]

it, he would not have established this maxim, the
most general of all that obtain among men, that each should follow the
custom of his own country. The glory of true equity would have brought all
nations under subjection, and legislators would not have taken as their
model the fancies and caprice of Persians and Germans instead of this
unchanging justice. We would have seen it set up in all the States on earth
and in all times whereas we see neither justice nor injustice which does
not change its nature with change in climate. Three degrees of latitude
reverse all jurisprudence a meridian decides the truth. Fundamental laws
change after a few years of possession right has its epochs the entry of
Saturn into the Lion marks to us the origin of such and such a crime. A
strange justice that is bounded by a river! Truth on this side of the
Pyrenees, error on the other side.

Men admit that justice does not consist in these customs, but that it
resides in natural laws, common to every country. They would certainly
maintain it obstinately, if reckless chance which has distributed human laws
had encountered even one which was universal but the farce is that the
caprice of men has so many vagaries that there is no such law.

Theft, incest, infanticide, parricide, have all had a place among virtuous
actions. Can anything be more ridiculous than that a man should have the
right to kill me because he lives on the other side of the water, and
because his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have none with him?

Doubtless there are natural laws but good reason once corrupted has
corrupted all. Nihil amplius nostrum est quod nostrum dicimus, artis est.40
Ex senatus--consultis et plebiscitis crimina exercentur.[41] Ut olim vitiis,
sic nunc legibus laboramus.[42]

The result of this confusion is that one affirms the essence of justice to
be the authority of the legislator another, the interest of the sovereign
another, present custom, and