Virtue Is Attractive: The Crossroads Walk

Monday, September 1, AD 2014

For the past 20 years, some wonderful young college students have been participating in “Crossroads Walk,” dedicating the 3 months of their summer vacation to trek each year across the nation on behalf of life.

The walk started in 1995 when 15 Franciscan University of Steubenville (OH) students took up then-Pope John Paul II’s challenge to you to spread the gospel of life. Those 15 students now number several hundred thousand and their 1 annual walk has grown into 3. Beginning in May and ending in August, participants trek from Seattle, San Francisco, and San Jose-Los Angeles, crossing 36 states before reaching their destination: Washington, DC. Each group covers anywhere from 10k-15k miles. Weekends feature the groups praying, providing counselling in front of abortion clinics, and speaking at local churches.

map

No doubt about it, Crossroads is a pro-life “civil rights” organization whose members seek to protect the civil right of the “right to life.”

Catch a glimpse of Crossroads Walk 2014:

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

4 Responses to Virtue Is Attractive: The Crossroads Walk

  • Pingback: Why Secular Humanists Can't Cope With Islam - BigPulpit.com
  • “It’s too bad these students aren’t being given attention in the media.”

    I’m afraid if they we’re given attention in todays media that it would of been misrepresented. The final cut would likely portray a band of hate mongers bent on ruining the reproductive rights of countless innocent women.

    These men and women are heroes.
    If todays media passes them by then it’s for good reason.

    God bless these young disciples.

  • I hope the group has learned a little bit about “evangelizing” lately. Several years ago a group came to the parish where my father was serving as deacon. They had a table in the foyer after Masses. I know they were probably exhausted from their journey but they just stood/sat at the table and then complained to me that no-one came over to see them. Having been involved in pro-life for decades myself, I tried to explain you have to get over by the doors and encounter people personally — meet them at the doors as they come out of Mass and the doors to the outside as they leave. Perhaps approach them as they socialize with each other in the narthex after Mass. I tried to demonstrate but I don’t think the lesson really took. I believe their lack of interaction stemmed from their youth and absence of public relations experience/training.

  • If they are harrassed by police, they have a right to sue. They all own the public places, especially if they are walking, they cannot be accussed fo loitering. They need one dollar, the smallest amount of money to be legal, and they cannot be accused of anything. A pro-life demonstration in Belle Air, Md. ended with a lawsuit and the city paid for strip searching the teens involved. big bucks.
    .
    Many people have a vacancy where pro-life ought to be. Some do not even know that a person begins with fertilization and the beginning of existence. The immediacy of the ensoulment at fertilization makes of the human being a child of God and a sovereign person with free will. The state gives the innocent person a tax bill and citizenship, but the sovereignty comes from a sovereign Creator.

Parents and praying for their children in school

Tuesday, August 26, AD 2014

 

Dr. Edward Mulholland, an assistant professor of classical and modern languages at Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas, recently discussed a prayer for students composed by St. Thomas Aquinas which the Angelic Doctor prayed before studying:

Creator of all things, true source of light and wisdom, origin of all being, graciously let a ray of your light penetrate the darkness of my understanding.

Take from me the double darkness in which I have been born, an obscurity of sin and ignorance.

Give me a keen understanding, a retentive memory, and the ability to grasp things correctly and fundamentally. Grant me the talent of being exact in my explanations and the ability to express myself with thoroughness and charm.

Point out the beginning, direct the progress, and help in the completion. I ask this through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Commenting on this prayer as it concerns college students, Dr. Mulholland describes parents and educators some of whom believe education is only about academics, others of whom believe it’s all about money, and yet others of whom believe it’s about prestige. And, yes, there are those parents and educators—almost certainly a very tiny minority in today’s world—who could care less about all of that, believing as they do that education is all about getting young people to persevere in morality.

As St. Thomas’ prayer reminds all of us, education and the virtue of humility are inextricably related: The proper attitude toward learning—whether in an elementary or secondary school or a college or university—is to allow God to form one’s mind to grasp the light of truth and, then, to will it in one’s life from the beginning through its completion. With that attitude, other utilitarian ends—academic success, money, and prestige—are put into proper perspective with morality becoming an imperative.

In 2008, the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life/U.S. Religious Landscape survey reported the prayer habits of Americans. Of particular interest, note the habits of U.S. Catholics:

Pew1

Among U.S. Catholics who report they do pray and broken down by political ideology, the following pattern emerges:

Pew2

Of those Catholic parents who report they do pray—irrespective of political ideology—how many pray for their children ?

With the new academic year now underway in many locales, wouldn’t it be wonderful if parents wrote down St. Thomas’ prayer on a notecard and presented it to each of their children, asking them to say the prayer at the start of each day of school? Better yet, to tell their children they will be saying St. Thomas’ prayer for each of them at the start of each school day?

 

 

 

To read Dr. Mulholland’s article, click on the following link:
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/leading-out-of-double-darkness?utm_campaign=dailyhtml&utm_medium=email&utm_source=dispatch

http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report2religious-landscape-study-key-findings.pdf

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

5 Responses to Parents and praying for their children in school

  • Grant me the talent of being exact in my explanations and the ability to express myself with thoroughness and charm. So sweet.

  • “Better yet, to tell their children they will be saying St. Thomas’ prayer for each of them at the start of each school day?”
    .
    Parents can bless their children and all people in the world, now and forever, in every prayer. A priest once told me to send my Guardian Angel to protect and stay with my children, then I realized that I could send my Guardian Angel to stay with every person who will accept and allow my angel to accompany him. Now, that is heavy duty prayer not to be denied.
    .
    Thank you for Thomas Aquinas’ prayer. A must save.

  • Pingback: Mosul Foretold - BigPulpit.com
  • The prayer by St. Thomas is new to me and a good one for adults as well in every day life. I still pray to my Guardian Angel each night upon retiring and when I begin a car trip. Yes, Mary De Voe, I too ask for my sons’ angels to watch over them.
    In Catholic school we started the day reciting the Morning Offering, “O Jesus, through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I offer Thee my prayers, works, joys, sufferings and sacrifices of this day…..”. I said it out loud with my sons on the way to school and have it in calligraphy hanging on our bedroom wall. I still say it each morning although my list of special intentions has certainly increased with age and with the increase of evils in our nation and the world. A holy card of the Morning Offering is a nice hand out for CCD classes. Of course there is always the brief “Holy Spirit, enlighten me!” before tests. Going down memory lane I remember in grade school folding our lined loose leaf in half and at the top center with an ink pen making a cross with JMJ (Jesus Mary and Joseph) beneath it.

  • The Feast of our Guardian Angels is a month away, October 2nd. It might be of interest on that day for those who have had encounters with their angel to relate them here. ?

Removing the Bible and prayer from public schools has caused student behavior to decline?

Thursday, August 21, AD 2014

 

It’s an eye-popping headline: “Education Expert: Removing Bible, Prayer from Public Schools Has Caused Decline” (italics added).

An education “expert” has evidence that the decades’ long decline in public education has been caused by removing the Bible and prayer? If true, that’s something of which everyone should take note!

Some background:

Recently, a professor at California State College in Long Beach and a senior fellow at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, NJ, William Jeynes, suggested to an audience at the Heritage Foundation the existence of a correlation between the decline of U.S. public schooling and the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1962 and 1963 decisions that ruled school-sponsored Bible reading.

According to a CNSNews.com article, Professor Jeynes said:

One can argue, and some have, that the decision by the Supreme Court—in a series of three decisions back in 1962 and 1963—to remove Bible and prayer from our public schools, may be the most spiritually significant event in our nation’s history over the course of the last 55 years.

Okay. That’s a fair enough assessment. But, what objective evidence supports the assertion? That so-called “correlation.”

Citing data from the federal government (Departments of Education, Justice, Health and Human Services and the U.S. Census Bureau) as well as research conducted by the advocacy groups Bibleasliterature.org, the Bible Literacy Project, the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, and California educator Nader Twal, Jeynes identified five negative outcomes since 1963 that have evidenced themselves in public schools across the nation:

  • academic achievement has plummeted, including SAT scores;
  • increased rate of out-of-wedlock births;
  • increased illegal drug use;
  • increased juvenile crime; and,
  • deterioration of student conduct.

Yes, those negative outcomes have evidenced themselves in government schools, no doubt about it.

But, that’s a pretty slippery statistical slope onto which Jeynes is venturing, unless he’s merely stating his personal opinion and citing alleged “research” to support his opinion. Why? There’s absolutely zero “proof”—no scientifically demonstrated causal relationship—that those negative outcomes are related to the removal of the Bible and/or prayer from government schools. They may be, but that’s different than demonstrating that they are. After all, aren’t most of those negative outcomes also associated with nongovernment schools—where Bible study and prayer have been present all of those decades—though perhaps not in the same magnitude?

Jeynes continued:

Now the question is, given that there is a movement to put the Bible as literature back in the public schools and a moment of silence and so forth, can we recapture the moral fiber—the foundation that used to exist among many of our youth?

To that end, Jeynes cited the movement to reinstate the Bible as literature in government schools, with 440 school districts in 43 states currently teaching this type of course. In addition, 10 states have passed a law or resolution to bring the Bible as literature in the public schools statewide.

Forget that slippery statistical slope. Jeynes’ proposed solution has absolutely no foundation in careful research nor the careful analysis of objective data. Reintroducing either the Bible and/or prayer into government schools may be a very good idea, but Jeynes fails to establish any scientific correlation or causation to support what in reality is only a hope. Yes, having hope may be better than doing nothing. But that’s not good social science research.

Moreover, much of the alleged “research” Jeynes cites to support his conclusion is not careful research and analysis of objective data. They are policy proposals based upon religious ideology. Once again, as good as that ideology may be, it must be subjected to rigorous research and analysis of objective data to determine its veracity.

Religious conservatives do themselves a grave disservice when they suggest that correlations “prove” causation.  The former indicate some type of relationship (positive or negative) while the latter demonstrate a hypothesis (“if…then”) given a pre-determined level of probability of error for analyzing objective data.

Implying causation may play well with the ignorant (that is, those who do not know better for a variety of reasons), but it doesn’t with liberals who know better and will use such “research” to make conservatives look stupid (that is, those who should have known better). It also besmirches the stellar reputation of conservative organizations, like the Heritage Foundation.

In the end, the kind of homily Jeynes offered his audience is better preached in a church than peddled as social science at the Heritage Foundation. Want the Bible and prayer returned to government schools? Organizing like-minded folks to mount a grassroots political effort doesn’t require “research.” It requires political will.

 

 

To read the CNSNews.com article, click on the following link:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/education-expert-removing-bible-prayer-public-schools-has-caused-decline

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

18 Responses to Removing the Bible and prayer from public schools has caused student behavior to decline?

  • I agree. My initial reaction was “he has a firm grasp of the obvious.”

    However, correlation is not causation. Causation needs to be proven. There are also at play other societal factors that contribute.

  • “or prohibit the free exercise thereof.” In Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptist Church, Jefferson cites the whole of the First Amendment before mentioning the “wall of separation of church and state”.
    .
    The government does not own the minor children, a captive audience in public school or any school as is mandated by law. The government has no real authority to ban the Bible or prayer or religion as these belong to the people, each and every one of the citizens and the will of the people must be observed.
    .
    The Motley Monk says that the political will must be ascertained. This has been done since 1776, or 1788 and in the First Amednment. Atheism, through the government is unconstitutional, simply because minor children have to exercise their religious freedom as a civil right to become aware of their reality as sovereign persons and citizens. Religious freedom as a civil right belongs to all people especially minor children. As a flower buds, freedom must bud.
    .
    Religious freedom is ours, then, now, and forever. Persons must remove the scales of the great liar from their eyes to see the need for our children to practice their civil rights and not be denied by any form of government.
    .
    The removal of prayer, the Bible and religious freedom from school is a miscarriage of Justice and the imposition of communism.

  • One interesting solution was enacted in the Jules Ferry Laws in France, which distinguished between “education,” which is the right and responsibility of the parents and “public instruction,” provided by the state.

    Accordingly, the laws provided that pupils in public schools must be provided with one full day a week (other than Sundays) so that their parents may provide them with religious instruction, if that is their wish. The schools used to close on Wednesday and Saturday afternoons (Saturday was a working day) and they still do close on Wednesday afternoons. Catechism classes on those afternoons are very popular with working parents.

    The other concession is that, in the case of private, mostly faith schools, the state pays the salaries of the teachers and librarians (but not the Principal or other staff), providing they prepare their pupils for the public examinations. In practice, there are few constraints; the only ones actually refused funding that I ever heard of were those using Arabic or Berber as the medium of instruction.

  • Bravo, Motley. Church historian the Venerable Cesare Baronius held that Catholics have no need to embellish, because the truth is sufficient to bring souls to God.

  • Reintroducing the Bible under cover of Literature… in hopes that the stories are powerful enough to reveal God? Hmm. Maybe. But as Motley says, the means are not justified for this end. Subterfuge is not an acceptable means, even to the best possible End of this world: the next world. This is an honorable difference between Christians and Muslims. More than honorable: metaphysical.

    This situation reminds me of the concern expressed in today’s WSJ book review of Deresiewicz’ Excellent Sheep,

    “The humanities are what we have, in a secular society, instead of religion,” he writes. They are where “educated people went to contemplate those questions of meaning and value and purpose” after the traditional source of that knowledge, religion, was discredited by science and skepticism.

    Any well-educated person in Western society should be familiar with stories from the Bible in order to be able to interpret our shared history. But the stories will be presented as discredited in order to be presented at all.

  • To me, Motley might be being a little hard on Jeynes who does say the removal of the bible etc is a significant “spiritual” event … Motley is asking for objective evidence about a spiritual event.
    Two ways can think about this – for real correlation we seek spiritual evidence for a spiritual event and I think we can find that– communities who read the bible are less likely to have high numbers of out of wedlock births, societies that throw the bible out are more likely to to have high numbers of same.

    I can see that those negative outcomes ( lack of achievement more out of wedlock babies etc) are in the spiritual category.
    Trying to read the signs of the times, to discern what is really happening means looking beyond the surface. It does not seem helpful to try to objectify or require a scientistic analysis of subtle social changes over times. is “proving” causality really necessary, or can we draw good and valid conclusions by seeing the truth that is all around us.

  • I rather suspect that it goes a lot further than Bibles and prayer. There is an active anti-God secular agenda being aggressively pushed in the public schools. Our families (indeed, even our churches) have been corrupted since the sixties moral revolution, more so) and that is the cause of the raw product entering school. Any chef knows you can’t make a great meal out of tainted ingredients.

  • The difficulty schools face is summarised in a circular from the Scottish Ministers on religious observance in schools.
    “Scotland is a society with a longstanding Christian tradition. The most recent census showed that Christianity remains the main religious influence in Scotland. 67% of the Scottish population reported having a religion. 65% reported being members of the Church of Scotland, Roman Catholic Church or other Christian churches. However, Scotland has for many generations also had other faith and belief traditions, never more so than at present as Scotland increasingly becomes a place for many cultures and beliefs. This trend is set to continue as Scotland sets out to attract people from other communities as part of Scottish Executive policy. We can expect Scotland to become increasingly diverse in the range of faith and belief traditions represented. Religious observance needs to be developed in a way which reflects and understands this diversity. It should be sensitive to our traditions and origins and should seek to reflect these but it must equally be sensitive to individual spiritual needs and beliefs, whether these come from a faith or non-faith perspective.”
    They also specified that “Where the school, whether denominational or non-denominational, is continuous with a faith community, that community’s faith in the “focus of worship”, may be assumed and worship may be considered to be appropriate as part of the formal activity of the school. Where, as in most non-denominational schools, there is a diversity of beliefs and practices, the review group believes that the appropriate context for an organised act of worship is within the informal curriculum as part of the range of activities offered for example by religions, groups, chaplains and other religious leaders.”
    http://scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/37428/0023554.pdf
    The compromise embodied in the Circular appears to be supported by a consensus of schools and parents.

  • Removal of the Bible is nothing more than censorship and book burning by the preposterous usurpation of parental rights. Teachers, all public education, is effected “in loco parentis” in the place of and with the power of attorney of the parents. The state does not own the child, or the public schools. The parents have authority over and the final say about what is taught to their children. Separating religious formation and public education is not the solution. The solution lays in the state, the public school and the teachers humbly acknowledging that they work “in loco parentis”.
    .
    Michael Paterson-Seymour: “One interesting solution was enacted in the Jules Ferry Laws in France, which distinguished between “education,” which is the right and responsibility of the parents and “public instruction,” provided by the state.”
    .
    “public instruction” is still the domain of the parents. When parental authority is usurped, that is, not actually acknowledged by the state, communism inheres

  • “Implying causation may play well with the ignorant (that is, those who do not know better for a variety of reasons), but it doesn’t with liberals who know better and will use such “research” to make conservatives look stupid (that is, those who should have known better).”
    .
    Interchange ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’ in that sentence, and you describe “climate change.” Other parallels run throughout the argument as well.
    .
    Pray our good people don’t follow that same worthless path.

  • Removal of the Bible, the mention of God and prayer in public school is totalitarian. The state has only to work for the common good and general welfare. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Any state who rejects Divine Providence is imposing atheism.

  • I agree Don L- not only is the Bible removed but it’s content is replaced by oppositional content. There is not just a void of scriptural reference, the void is filled with reference to anti God, and especially anti Judeo Christian, philosophy.

  • Removing the Bible and prayer and insinuating atheistic evolution denies the human being’s immortal soul and the metaphysical, the spirit of man. Why ought young people behave when they are taught that they have no eternal reward, that it is now or never?

  • At Oxford until the 1960s, “Smalls” was part of the entrance exam. I sat it in 1964. It consisted of six gobbets from the Greek New Testament (invariably from the Gospels or Acts), which the candidate had to translate into English, identify its source and relate it to its context. Care appears to have been taken to avoid anything doctrinally controversial, or passages that were word-for-word identical in two or more of the Synoptics. Candidates were allowed tree hours.

    It ensured at least a certain familiarity with the Sacred Text. I wonder how most 17-year olds, even at Catholic schools, would fare in such an exam today.

  • M P-S: Every battle of our generation is about norms. Every one. C.S. Lewis said that if you catch someone doing something wrong, he’ll try to justify it by citing some excuse or exception; no one ever responds by admitting it and flouting right and wrong. That’s not true any more. The battles of our time are about the denial of any standard, any basic knowledge or agreed-upon principle, anything fixed at all.

    Our society decided it would rather rule in Hell than serve in Heaven, but even Hell is under God’s law. Now it’s trying to deny the existence of law.

  • AMEN… Right on target and so very well stated each time. Mary De Voe on Thursday, August 21, A.D. 2014 at 10:57am

  • Pingback: The Saintly Crusader-King - BigPulpit.com

The Extraordinary Synod on Marriage and Family: How empathy promotes division…

Monday, August 11, AD 2014

 

Over at The Catholic Thing, Brad Miner posts a fantasy discussion between a Catholic man and a divorced Catholic woman who has announced she is getting remarried. The gist of it is that a priest—Fr. Blithe—has told the woman that the remarriage is fine. Moreover, he will witness it at St. Brendan’s. The Catholic man will have nothing of it, and tells her so. Or, better, he re-catechizes the woman about Church teaching—the “rules.” She concludes, “That is so unfair!”

The scene aptly describes the situation confronting the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops this October concerning marriage and family.

Reading numerous websites—including the National Catholic Reporter and The Wanderer—to get the full spectrum of what Catholics are thinking about the Synod, Miner’s post identifies what appear to be the fault lines. On the one side, there are those who hope the Synod will change Church teaching. These are the forces of pastoral reform who feel angry because the Church is being “so unfair.” On the other side, there are those arguing that Church teaching must not and cannot change.

Unfortunately, many view the matter of marriage and family as well as the division among Catholics as a political matter, in particular, where theology and ecclesiology interface. They would have the division dealt with and solved politically, not as a rupture in the Church that requires healing. Empathy for the plight and feelings people have as a result of their freely-made commitments—important as it is and as is required within the Christian community—may make people feel better. But, it doesn’t bring healing. After all, empathy for a Stage 1 cancer patient doesn’t keep the cancer from spreading.

That is where Miner’s post is extremely important.

At first read, some (and more likely, many) Catholics will be offended by this Catholic man’s patient, persistent, and sound catechesis and will not empathize with him. Instead, they will attack his character, lack of compassion, as well as his fundamental lack of awareness. “After all,” they will argue, “the times have changed.” One can easily imagine someone asking the Catholic man: “Just who do you think you are to tell this poor woman how to live her life? Fr. Blithe has it exactly right because he cares for her like Jesus cared for sinners.”

The trouble is that Fr. Blithe has it all wrong. Moreover, he has allowed empathy to trump his role and responsibilities, at least, according to Cardinal Gerhard Mueller, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

In an interview soon to be published in The Hope of the Family, Cardinal Mueller takes the Fr. Blithes of the world to task, unloading an arsenal of arguments in support of the indissolubility of marriage. He argues, in particular, that indissolubility of marriage is no mere doctrine that’s subject to change, but a divine and definitive dogma of the Church that’s unchangeable. What the Cardinal intimates is necessary is not a political solution but a cure for the division that exists. That requires recover the sacramental understanding of marriage and family.

To that end, Cardinal Mueller lays all of his cards on the table in that interview. According to the interview as reported by The Wanderer, Cardinal Mueller seeks:

  • to correct any misunderstanding about the Church’s teaching on family;
  • to underscore the dramatic situation of the children of separated parents; and,
  • to stress that more education is needed and that education should start from the reality of the love of God.

Okay, that’s all fine. But, that doesn’t respond directly to the Church’s Fr. Blithes. Not backing off, Cardinal Mueller states:

  • Of Fr. Blithe’s argument that the Church should allow spouses to “start life over again” and that the love between two persons may die: “These theories are radically mistaken.” After all, “One cannot declare a marriage to be extinct on the pretext that the love between the spouses is ‘dead’,” because “the indissolubility of marriage does not depend on human sentiments, whether permanent or transitory. This property of marriage is intended by God Himself. The Lord is involved in marriage between man and woman, which is why the bond exists and has its origin in God. This is the difference.”
  • Of Fr. Blithe’s mistaken social notions about marriage that result from individualism: “In a world that is angrily individualistic and subjectivist, marriage is not perceived anymore as an opportunity for the human being to achieve his completeness, sharing love.”
  • Of Fr. Blithe’s failure to prepare couples adequately for marriage: More in-depth education about marriage, including “remote preparation for marriage — from infancy and adolescence — should be a major pastoral and educational priority.”
  • Of Fr. Blithe’s mistaken notion of the virtue of justice: “[A]mong the poor of the Third and Fourth World,” those relegated to the “existential peripheries,” there are “the children who must grow up without their parents,” the “orphans of divorce,” who are perhaps “the poorest of the poor of the world.” These poorest of the poor, these orphans of divorce, are most often found, not in materially impoverished nations, but in Europe and North America—some of the world’s wealthiest places

What advice Cardinal Mueller might have for Fr. Blithe?

As a shepherd, I say to myself: It can’t be! We must tell people the truth! We should open their eyes, telling them they have been cowardly tricked through a false anthropology which can only lead to disaster.

Now, none of that’s very empathetic.

Or, is it?

Cardinal Muller said: “[W]e should above all speak about the authentic love and the concrete project which Christ has for every person.”

Is it authentic love to withhold the truth from a spouse?

In the end, Brad Miner’s catechetical efforts are doing more to promote healing than are Fr. Blithe’s efforts to make the divorced woman feel good by arranging a sham marriage ceremony at St. Brendan’s.

 

 

 

 

To read Brad Miner’s discussion over at The Catholic Thing, click on the following link:
http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2014/modern-re-marriage-a-fantasy.html .

To read about Cardinal Mueller’s interview in The Wanderer, click on the following link:
http://thewandererpress.com/featured-today/cardinal-mueller-clarifies-marriages-indissolubility-is-a-dogma/

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

6 Responses to The Extraordinary Synod on Marriage and Family: How empathy promotes division…

  • Nowadays, we think of marriage tribunals as dealing primarily with cases of nullity. Historically, however, as a glance at the Frankish chronicles will show, bishops seem originally to have been chiefly involved in cases of desertion (or expulsion) of one spouse by another and to have inflicted censures on the recalcitrant.

    Of course, they could not exercise jurisdiction over marriage by halves. If they could grant decrees of adherence, they had to decide what were just grounds of separation and what were or were not valid marriages. Where this required a protracted examination of facts or law, bishops began to refer cases to a judge or tribunal for investigation and decision. Also, starting in the 11th century, canonists began building up a body of law on consistorial cases and to establish rules of evidence and procedure, which form the foundation of the modern law.

  • Reading numerous websites—including the National Catholic Reporter and The Wanderer—to get the full spectrum of what Catholics are thinking about the Synod, Miner’s post identifies what appear to be the fault lines. On the one side, there are those who hope the Synod will change Church teaching. These are the forces of pastoral reform who feel angry because the Church is being “so unfair.” On the other side, there are those arguing that Church teaching must not and cannot change.

    In other words, it’s sentimentality versus faith allied to reason.

  • During a pontificate that has given new meaning to Ralph Waldo Emerson’s quote, “When it gets really dark, you can see the stars” (my version, slightly adapted), Card. Mueller appears to be emerging as the true shepherd of the Church, lighting the way, speaking with a reasoned clarity that is disturbingly lacking in the Pontifex Maximus.

    This is notwithstanding Mueller’s diatribes against the SSPX, nor his better-to-be-forgotten mis-eucumenism about European Protestant evangelical churches being “sister churches” of the Catholic Church (2011 Address, Katholische Akademie in Bayern; an address mostly ignored in the West because it was given of course in German), I am hoping with all my might that he can withstand Kasper and his daimon in the wings, Card. Karl Lehmann, in their unfinished business to deconstruct one of the few mainstay beliefs still left standing of Catholic doctrine.

  • Steve Phoenix

    It is, perhaps, not without significance that the Pope Emeritus should have chosen Cardinal Mueller as the editor of his complete works, a task the Cardinal obviously finds congenial – He is up to volume VII of that formidable undertaking.

  • “empathy promotes division…”
    Sad but true! When you try to admit to some validity for another side of an argument, the other side discerns your gentility as weakness and picks it up and beats you over the head with it!
    Seems like everything is a battle these days! We used to have the authorities that we all agreed on that tamped down our seemingly endless belligerence. (Marquess of Queensberry, Hoyle, etc ) but now it’s always Katie Bar the Door! and giving an inch is the same as giving a mile.
    .
    “O, I sympathize with your plight”
    /
    “Then give me communion and let me have a big wedding in the cathedral
    Or your Church is a Church of hate.”

  • It makes no difference anyway. Marriage is a dying institution as is the Catholic Church. Rome has long blessed adultery and every crime against marriage. She is just more open about it under the heretic Francis.

It’s all Israel’s fault, isn’t it?

Monday, July 28, AD 2014

 

Over at the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) the first of a new series of sociopolitical blog posts on issues related to the Middle East begins:

More than 500 people have died in Gaza as of Monday morning. The latest tragedy came with the killing of over 60 Palestinian civilians in a Gaza neighborhood destroyed by Israeli shelling. Add to that 3,000 injured, vital infrastructure and apartment buildings destroyed, and 1.8 million Palestinians trapped in an area the size of Manhattan with nowhere to run from the death raining on them from the skies. On the Israeli side, the death toll stands at 20.

Every innocent death, Israeli or Palestinian, is one too many. All the same, the world has gotten inured to Israeli tactics of massive and disproportionate response to acts of violence. The stubborn, feckless resistance of Hamas gives the Israelis apparent cause for their indiscriminate strikes. Palestinian suffering has become routine. As a result, the international community heaves a collective shrug when they hear about Palestinian deaths. The world is no longer moved to learn of Palestinian affliction.

The blog post continues:

Insidious racism colors perceptions of the conflict and reactions to it. If we had 400 Israeli deaths instead, the world would have been in an uproar, as it should. Giving Palestinian civilians a couple minutes’ warning to evacuate a civilian building where a Hamas member lives or had been a few minutes before when there is nowhere to run is a mere fig leaf disguising ingrained Israeli indifference to Palestinian life.

And, then, it states:

The Arab enemy is necessary to keep the world from looking too closely at Israel’s record of illegitimate acts.

Is there any question about where this particular blog post (or perhaps this series) is headed?

Yes, it’s all about those racist Israelis—the puppets of the Great Satan—and the most vile of them, the Likud Party, before which the world cowers. Due simply to racism, the Israelis will do anything—using brutal force that includes sophisticated weaponry—to smote and eventually drive the Palestinian people into the Mediterranean Sea. Seizing upon the world’s collective guilt in the years following World War II, those racist Israelis commandeered the Palestinian homeland.

Yes, indeed. Those racist Israelis. Absolutely no provocation. Those unjustly besieged Palestinians whose homeland was stolen from under their feet.

Before making a judgment, watch David Prager’s summary of how the conflict came to be what it is today:

Not one word of any of this in the NCR blog post.

Seems the NCR story has it backwards, doesn’t it. Who is really racist? Who has been the provocateur? Who seeks the death of the other?

For a moment, let’s consider one item: The tunnels Hamas has constructed as they are described in an article published by the Journal of Palestinian Studies (JPS).

In 2004, Israel leveled the territory separating Gaza from Egypt to create what was supposed to be a barren corridor. One decade later, the corridor is buzzing with all sorts of activity above and beneath the surface. What happened? The territory’s governing body—the Palestinian Islamist movement, Hamas—has built and operates a tunnel complex that feeds Gaza’s economy and, through the taxes collected, Hamas’ coffers for its war against Israel.

Pretty good, huh? As one Hamas Gaza leader, Mahmud Zahar, explained, “No electricity, no water, no food came from outside. That’s why we had to build the tunnels.”  The tunnels rapidly turned into what one trader described as “the lungs through which Gaza breathes.”

Sounds like the stuff of ancient mythology: “Out of the ashes, the Phoenix rises.”

Perhaps it is. But not quite the way one might think, that is, if one listens only to the supporters of Hamas.

The tunnels Hamas built to keep taxes flowing into its coffers were constructed by teams consisting of 6 laborers whose members worked in 2, 12-hour shifts to dig 10 to 15 meters/day.

Guess who manned those teams?

According to the JPS article, child laborers who “much as in Victorian coal mines, they are prized for their nimble bodies.” While Hamas officials admit that at least 160 children have been killed in the tunnels, public outrage indicates that more children died while constructing those tunnels.

Nowhere in the NCR blog post is there even a hint that Hamas has engaged in internationally proscribed conduct. For example, Article 3 (d) of International Labour Organization Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 (No. 182) defines hazardous child labor as “(d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.”

If that’s not good enough, the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church states:

Child labour, in its intolerable forms, constitutes a kind of violence that is less obvious than others but it is not for this reason any less terrible….The Church’s social doctrine condemns the increase in “the exploitation of children in the workplace in conditions of veritable slavery.”  This exploitation represents a serious violation of human dignity, with which every person, “no matter how small or how seemingly unimportant in utilitarian terms.” (#296)

Exploiting children violates their human dignity no matter how small or insignificant they may seem to Hamas and its larger political goal of eliminating Israel. To fuel achieving that end, Hamas has used the means of depriving Palestinian children of their childhood years by forcing them to labor in a corrupt and dangerous environment.

What a great way to treat God’s children!

This exploitation of children is both unjust and unfair, defying international covenants as well as Church teaching. But, not one word of this either in the NCR blog post.

But, then, should anyone expect “fair and balanced” in NCR’s reportage and blog posts?

 

 

 

To read the International Labour Organization’s definition and examples of child exploitation across the globe, click on the following link:
http://www.ilo.org/ipec/facts/WorstFormsofChildLabour/Hazardouschildlabour/lang–en/index.htm

To read the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, click on the following link:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html

To read the Journal of Palestinian Studies article, click on the following link:
http://www.palestine-studies.org/journals.aspx?id=11424&jid=1&href=fulltext

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

9 Responses to It’s all Israel’s fault, isn’t it?

  • “If we had 400 Israeli deaths instead, the world would have been in an uproar, as it should.”

    Not remotely true. The world would barely blink, issue a boilerplate statement of sorrow about the “cycles of violence” and would get back to business.

    God knows NCR would do precisely that. Come on–NCR offers an editorial forum for concerns about Palestinian deaths when it offers no similar commentary about the pogrom in Mosul, nor can it even mention at all the Krystallnacht redux in various pro-Hamas protests. So, yes, unutterable BS.

  • “The world would barely blink, issue a boilerplate statement of sorrow about the “cycles of violence” and would get back to business.”

    Quite right. I am sure that most NCR contributors and readers have precisely the same concern for Israeli lives that they have for the lives taken through abortion. When you are on the left in this country, some lives simply do not count.

  • I am pleased, albeit quite surprised, that the comments on the NCR post are overwhelmingly negative:

    http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/equality-necessary-lasting-peace-between-israel-palestine

  • It’s only Israel’s fault when American can’t be blamed.
    .
    And America can always be blamed. Especially where Isreal is concerned.

  • Stop firing rockets and digging tunnels.

    Problem solved.

  • Having fallen through the looking glass, our President and Secretary of State demand that Israel do more to prevent civilian casualties in Gaza. Israel already demonstrates incredible care for the ‘civilians’ of this sick terrorist society.
    Far more effective would be for Hamas to do more to prevent civilian casualties in Gaza. All they would need to do is stop committing war crimes.

  • The Left hates Israel
    Islamists hate Israel
    The Nazis hated Israel (or least the Jews)
    The Left murders unborn children
    Islamists use born children as suicide bombers
    The Nazis experimented on children, born and unborn
    Really, what operative difference is there between these groups? They are all evil.

  • NCR cares nothing about the Chaldeans? Whodathunkit?

  • I was curious about who in the world wrote this very shallow piece so I looked up the authors of the blog post:
    Jesuit Fr. Drew Christiansen is former editor of America magazine and a professor of ethics at Georgetown University.
    Ra’fat Aldajani is a Palestinian-American writer and commentator. Can you believe that? It took two people to write this very weak minded blog post!
    They titled their joint work “Equality is necessary for lasting peace between Israel, Palestine.” What? Equality in what? Lame.
    Like the talk about disproportionate response from Israel. That’s crazy– they want a proportionate response? How porportionate is our goal is all of you wiped off the face of the earth. Lame, Lame, Lame.

Beware of government mammon: It always comes with strings attached…

Friday, July 25, AD 2014

 

A Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice report indicates that converting private Catholic schools into charter schools can significantly increase school enrollment, reversing enrollment declines even after several decades. The primary reasons cited for these declines?

  • The rising cost of Catholic education that’s attributable to the shift in from religious/clergy teachers to lay educators.
  • The increase in the number of charter schools.

Confronting these issues, 3 of the nation’s archdioceses—Indianapolis, Miami, and Washington, DC—have allowed some schools to reopen as independently managed, public charter schools rather than close them. (Philadelphia has done similarly.)

Overall, this transformation has increased enrollments and students seem to be achieving well. In addition, the archdioceses no longer are pouring money into moribund schools, enabling these archdioceses to support other operations, provide additional $$$s to support schools that remain in operation, and provide tuition assistance to qualifying students.

Sounds like “all’s well that ends well” story, no? Everyone’s a winner!

Well, perhaps not.

The decision to accept state funds to run schools carries with it some foreseeable consequences. In retrospect, these consequences may make today’s “solution” appear foolhardy.

Consider the example of the Archdiocese of Vancouver (Canada) where the state fully funds Catholic schools. For more than two centuries, many U.S. Catholics have understandably advocated for a similar policy.

According to an article published by Straight.com, an 11-year-old student attending Delta’s Sacred Heart Elementary School, Tracey Wilson, was diagnosed during the past year with gender dysphoria and wanted to be treated as a girl. The school’s administrators refused, citing the Catholic Independent Schools of the Vancouver Archdiocese (CISVA) policy regarding gender expression and gender dysphoria.

In response, Tracey Wilson filed a human rights complaint, causing CIVSA to resolve rather than contest the complaint. The terms of the resolution included apologizing to Tracey and her family “for not being in a position to meet her needs” as well as paying the Wilson family an undisclosed amount of $$$s.

The CISVA policy is similar to the policy the Vancouver Public School Board approved  one month earlier. However, the resolution in this case makes CISVA the first school district in Canada to have a policy accommodating gender expression and gender dysphoria among students.

Of the policy, CISVA Superintendent Doug Lauson said:

We expect that this policy will be a practical basis for accommodating students with gender dysphoria, or who express their gender in ways that are different from prevailing stereotypes. This policy will ensure that Catholic schools are a safe and accepting place for all students.

“Free” government money always comes “with strings attached.” In this instance, the mammon that’s raining down from the state upon Catholic schools (charter or otherwise) may very well end up forcing district superintendents to compromise the Catholic identity of those schools in order to keep the rain pouring down.
 

 

To read the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice report, click on the following link:
http://www.edchoice.org/CMSModules/EdChoice/FileLibrary/1048/Sector-Switchers-Why-Catholic-Schools-Convert-to-Charters-and-What-Happens-Next.pdf

To read the CISVA policy, click on the following link:
http://www.cisva.bc.ca/policy_manual/CISVA_Gender_Dysphoria_Policy.pdf

To read about the CISVA case and resolution, click on the following link:
http://www.straight.com/news/687496/vancouver-catholic-schools-introduce-transgender-policy-after-human-rights-complaint

To read the Vancouver Public School Board policy, click on the following link:
http://www.straight.com/life/652381/vancouver-school-boards-lgbtq-policy-sparks-debate

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

53 Responses to Beware of government mammon: It always comes with strings attached…

  • Your problem is the regulatory scheme, and the occupational culture of people employed in the apparat implementing the regulations. ‘Diversity’ is the dogma of a certain bourgeois type and their regular practice has made plain what Gottfried Dietze argued in 1968 and Robert Bork argued in 1963: anti-discrimination laws are at war with conventional conceptions of free association. It did not look bad when it was Lester Maddox and the like whose ox was gored and the intended clientele were a modest and fairly patient minority being subject to a mess of unearned indignities every day of the week. As of now, what it means is that cultural minorities will be subject to the fashions of the haut bourgeois and that everyone’s discretionary decisions in trade and employment and schooling are now subject to second-guessing by lawyers.

    You need to dissolve those regulatory agencies and replace them with ones concerned with a more circumscribed set of questions (e.g. building and fire codes, payment of employees in cash and not scrip, workmen’s compensation coverage, employee leave time, regents’ examination results, respect for the state penal code in disciplinary matters, &c).

  • He who has the gold, makes the rules.
    .
    Witness Georgetown and Notre Dame, post Land o Lakes and receipt of research dollars from secular private foundations (ie., Rockefeller Foundation).
    .
    Once Catholic universities were transformed from within and are Catholic no more.

  • Witness Georgetown and Notre Dame, post Land o Lakes and receipt of research dollars from secular private foundations (ie., Rockefeller Foundation).

    I would not say that was not a force. Just two things: the Church imploded all over the place, from the local parish to Vatican dicasteries. The driver there is not public money, but its own loss of institutional elan. The people running higher education institutions did not wish to be authentically Catholic as the term was understood in 1958. (Also, people running state colleges and universities are happy to turn them into sandboxes and would be indignant if the state legislature ever called them out and imposed sanctions. They may be fools but they are not truckling fools).

  • In France, those private schools that receive state funding enjoy greater freedom than those that do not; the former are supervised by the Ministry of Education, under nationally agreed codes of practice; the latter are illegal, under the law forbidding “contracts of association,” unless they receive a permit from the Préfet, who can make it subject to such « règlements de police » as he sees fit. There have been many clashes between the authorities and schools who wish to use any language other than French as the medium of instruction, especially in the Basque country. Arabic and Berber have also been restricted.

    In Scotland, the position is fiendishly complicated: some Catholic schools are independent, others receive direct grant-aid from central government and others are funded by the local authority, under a statutory scheme.

    Of course, any government that controls admission to the public service and the professions can effectively control the curriculum. As Bastiat said, unless you pass the public examinations, you will be able to become neither a physician nor a barrister nor a magistrate nor a consul nor a diplomat nor a teacher, nor a public functionary – The list goes on.

  • Of course, any government that controls admission to the public service and the professions can effectively control the curriculum. –

    This is America. People are not preparing for their medical boards in elementary school.

  • All of which may be true but fail to acknowledge that many Catholics are so only in so far as it is convenient to identify as such. Fr. Matthew Guckin (the chaplain of our high school) put it thus in a homily, about a year ago: “sending your child to Catholic school when the school district isn’t good is reasonable. Educating your child in Catholic schools, when you live in a good school district, is an act of faith.”

  • The strings attached to the mammon offered to Catholic administrators to transform Catholic lower schools into Charter Schools will eventually erode the schools’ Catholic identity.
    .
    Who would ever imagine that a Catholic priest carrying a cross and peacefully protesting at the University of Notre Dame would be arrested and jailed by campus security for practicing the faith. It happened to the late Fr. Norman Weslin in 2009.
    .
    In 1969, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger commented:
    .
    “…The church will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning.
    .
    She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity.
    As the number of her adherents diminishes . . . she will lose many of her social privileges. . . As a small society, [the Church] will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members….
    .
    It will be hard-going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek . . . The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution — when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain . . . But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.
    .
    And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, which is dead already, but the Church of faith. She may well no longer be the dominant social power to the extent that she was until recently; but she will enjoy a fresh blossoming and be seen as man’s home, where he will find life and hope beyond death…”
    .
    Source: Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. “The church will become small.” from Faith and the Future (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2009) and

    http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/Interiorlife/iloo13.htm

  • So beautiful and frightening a sentiment. As much as I liked JPII and am intrigued and touched by Francis, Benedict speaks to me.

  • An eleven year old infant is demanding of and ordering adults around because, maybe, he does not acknowledge or recognize who he is. Without informed consent, not knowing, an eleven year old, is being followed to his doom and our doom for indulging an eleven year old infant terrible.
    .
    As far as the money goes, taxes are owned by the taxpayers even as the taxes are administered by the administration. There is no problem with public money being employed to educate the public. The education must be only the truth. The truth is the complete and absolute absence of evil. Extenuating circumstances and diversity as well as toleration may be excised by the parents whose primary concern is their children’s education, as teachers and adminstrators act “in loco parentis”, the grown up, adult and emancipated citizens.

  • It might be added, as every doctor already knows, that children, unemancipated infant children go in and out of phases, fantasies and pretense just to try out being somebody, anybody and everybody else.
    .
    It is indeed fun, but out of control.

  • Based on what happened in Charlotte earlier this year, government mammon isn’t necessary to erode Catholic identity in Catholic schools. The mammon that comes from “c”atholics, “cultural catholics,” and non-Catholics using Catholic schools as a “private schools for the rest of us” (kind of like how Volkswagen is an affordable alternative to BMW & Daimler-Benz) seems, to this outsider, to be doing the job just fine.

  • Slainté

    The Law of Separation (Loi du 9 décembre 1905 concernant la séparation des Eglises et de l’Etat) abolished the payment of clerical salaries by the state. The loss was not inconsiderable – 42,324,933 fr or $8,464,986. The current real value is $470,653,221.

    In the event, the Church in France saw an intellectual and artistic flowering, with Blondel, Maritian, Claudel, Péguy, Mauriac, Brémond, de Lubac, Yves Simon, Daniélou, Congar, Bouyer, and many, many others.

    Today, we have what has been called the “Catholic turn” in French philosophy, the way in which the most original and prominent thinkers of contemporary France seem to function within Catholic horizons: the philosophers René Girard, Pierre Manent, Jean-Luc Marion, Rémy Brague, Chantal Delsol, along with the writers Michel Tournier, Jean Raspail, Jean D’Ormesson, Max Gallo, Denis Tillinac and others – a small, but vibrant and self-conscious minority.

    There is a danger here, of course; one sometimes senses an uncharitable impatience with the weaker brethren who plod and stumble. Some of the Holy Father’s remarks are very apposite in a French context.

  • The only way to be sure that the secular/pagan govt does not end up dictating ungodly curriculum to a private K-12 school is to make sure that none of the money funding the private school ever comes directly from the govt. Otherwise it is just a matter of time until some rule/reg/atheist/offended parent/rebellious kid/liberal judge/ex-employee/liberal politician/teachers’ union/public school superintendent/state or federal dept of ed employee/state or federal law/grant/memoramdum if understanding, etc. will make it happen.

    I think that a mechanism, by which parents (or who ever pays for a child’s private k-12 education) can submit a form with their annual taxes for a tax credit for the cost of the tuition paid, needs to be set up. The infrastructure for this to happen us already in place. It would simply require the 501-3C ID number of the school where the tuition was paid & copies of the receipts. Tables could easily be developed for each county/state in which people live for reimbursement of taxes paid.

    Of course the liberal establishment would raise 9 kinds of Hell over it–but they are doing that on a regular basis anyway–so who cares.

    My point is, the parents/individuals paying the tuition would be using their own money of their own free choice–no actual govt money would ever reach the coffers of the private schools. This would help limit the sticky, controlling tentacles of govt through any funding mechanism into the private schools.

  • Schools reflect the families who send their kids there. A Catholic school is only as faithful to Church teaching as the families insist it be. Frankly, it is easier to use the services one pays taxes for than to double down on a Catholic school education. Our schools are darned expensive and, if we treated them like the gem they are, we’d invest more heavily in them. As it is pastors increasingly see our schools as some sort of a drain on parish funds rather than a vehicle for raising up the next generation of saints. That’s the crux of the matter: we wouldn’t need state funding of we valued our schools.

  • Ms. Gordon, I entirely agree with you, by the way.

  • “Educating your child in Catholic schools, when you live in a good school district, is an act of faith.”

    Unfortunately, a friend of mine (devout Catholic) had to remove her daughter from a local Catholic high school where they felt their daughter’s faith was being destroyed.

    At the Catholic school their daughter was being heavily influenced by lesbian and atheistic nuns.

  • Which brings us back to the question of whether we value our schools as vehicles for raising the next generation of saints or not. The majority of our schools do a good job BUT it is not helpful for the Catholics, best educated in their faith, to quietly segregate their families from the rest of the faith. We need to reclaim our schools, not meekly consign them to the trash heap. Our bishops will only take them as seriously as we do. Our pastors will only support them if we value them. We fight for our faith, like Christ in the Temple, we don’t fall away like the Disciples after the Garden.

  • “As far as the money goes, taxes are owned by the taxpayers even as the taxes are administered by the administration.”

    I provided private Braille services to a Catholic child who was attending a parochial private Protestant school–the Catholic schools had no way to serve him until he had advanced to a higher level of Braille reading–he could not read Braille at all when I first started working with him.

    4 state agencies had denied him services for years–& it took me a year and a half of threatening, cajoling, cornering, involving legislators, the governor’s office, generally beating the powers that be with a baseball bat–to eek put basic services for the child. It was one ugly, dog eat dog fight that did permanent damage to my career prospects as I was fighting people who could advance me. He was in my church’s school at the time. That is why I took such an interest in it. He was also a 5 year old blind, African American child. Now why would people who had funds to serve such a child DENY him those services when it was their professional, ethical & moral responsibility to provide them? (please note: a private attorney found that one of these agencies alone had 4 federal accounts with which to purchase things for this child but were refusing to do so)

    Two motivations: 1. Control–no one was going to tell them what to do with their money–they feared that providing services to one child in a private school would encourage other parents of students with disabilities to seek services (& therefore take more of their money away from them)

    2. Pure, unadulterated, visceral hatred for the private schools and home schooling families in our state.

  • Two motivations: 1. Control–no one was going to tell them what to do with their money–they feared that providing services to one child in a private school would encourage other parents of students with disabilities to seek services (& therefore take more of their money away from them)

    2. Pure, unadulterated, visceral hatred for the private schools and home schooling families in our state.

    You don’t say what the ‘services’ are, but yours is a tale that suggests that the apparat in question is diseased and needs to be liquidated. We’d do better to rely on the state to engage in some income re-distribution and to issue vouchers, insurance, and allowances in a few problem markets, but otherwise not rely on public agencies to provide anything other than a police and regulatory inspectorate or genuine public goods.

  • This is what I’m not getting: Catholicism in America was most vibrant when we were despised and left to our own devices. If our ancestors were able to build a system that was second to none without State aid, why can’t we re-build it without State aid?! It sure looks like the important factor is us, not the State. We need to stop making excuses for our schools and parishes and charitable activities. They are what we allow them to be.

  • “You don’t say what the ‘services’ are, but yours is a tale that suggests that the apparat in question is diseased and needs to be liquidated.”
    .
    All block grants to different government agencies are kept by the agency if not used. Therefore, it is in their best interest to deny clients help. It is also in their best interest to inspire rabid anti-Catholic sentiment, read mob-rule, to justify their denial of help.
    .
    Ronald Reagan had to dissolve the Legal Aid Agency because it was using the withheld government funding to campaign against him, which, of course, is illegal. I do not know how Reagan survived the political assault “for not helping the poor”.
    .
    Again, tax money belongs to the tax payers even as it is administered by the administration. Therefore, even paying chaplains, Catholic schools and priests, as is done in other countries, is permissible and wise. as well as just. Only a rabid religious discrimination would forbid tax money to better the common good and general welfare as is stated in the Preamble of our Constitution.
    .
    Paying for Catholic Schools would support the First Amendment and encourage the Ten Commandments, principles that are in accord with all men being “created equal”. “Thou shalt not kill” would certainly go a long way to preventing schools shootings.
    .
    Obama might be well considered the Chief Executive in charge of religious discrimination for the enhancement of his grab for totalitarian power.

  • “That’s the crux of the matter: we wouldn’t need state funding of we valued our schools.”
    .
    We would not need state funding if the state and government did not take 50% of what we earn.

  • Barbara Gordon: Thank you for fighting for equity. There is always a cost. Welcome to the small church blossoming anew.
    .
    “In 1969, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger commented:
    .
    “…The church will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning.
    .
    She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity.
    As the number of her adherents diminishes . . . she will lose many of her social privileges. . . As a small society, [the Church] will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members….”

  • MPS,
    .
    The 1905 Law of Separation of Church and State was a unilateral breach by the French State of the “Concordat of 1801” between Napoleon and Pope Pius VII whereby the French State agreed to compensate the Church for the wrongful and violent confiscation by French Revolutionaries of Church properties and the income generated from those properties. The income was the source of funding for the Church’s ecclesiastical activities in pre-revolutionary France.
    .
    When the French State in 1905 unilaterally elected to “abolished the payment of clerical salaries by the state”, it was, in fact, re-asserting its supremacy over the Church by willfully defaulting on its agreement to pay reimbursement to the Church for the Church’s confiscated properties and income.
    .
    In 1905 the French State reminded the Catholic Church that the State was supreme and that what the State gives (or consents to do), the State may unilaterally undo at its sole election whenever and however it pleases.
    .
    History reminds us that Catholic schools should not be dependent on government funding.

  • With respect, the Church in America was built by the poorest of the poor. Though living in tenements, they built cathedrals, seminaries, schools, convents, and orphanages and then filled them to overflowing.

    We chagrin spending $100 on the parish sweepstakes.

    Our ancestors went to Reconciliation weekly.

    We bristle at going annually.

    Their Knights filled Broadway for 15 blocks on Columbus day.

    Ours won’t take a bus to the Basilica for Corpus Christi.

    The problem is us, not the State.

  • Catholicism in America was most vibrant when we were despised and left to our own devices. If our ancestors were able to build a system that was second to none without State aid, why can’t we re-build it without State aid?! It sure looks like the important factor is us, not the State. We need to stop making excuses for our schools and parishes and charitable activities. They are what we allow them to be.

    The Protestant congregations have also seen their apostolates decay and dissolve. As for what’s left of Catholic institutions, look at the messes in Charlotte, N.C. and Providence, RI. The people who pay the tuition and are employed by those decayed enterprises do not adhere to what the Church teaches and are indignant when those teachings are brought up. What do those two bishops do about it? Squat.

    While we’re at it, ‘despised’ by whom? My Catholic great-great grandfathers were not ‘despised’ in their communities, quite the contrary. I am sure there were places they were not welcome, but that’s an unfortunate by-product of people taking communal distinctions seriously.

  • “You don’t say what the ‘services’ are, but yours is a tale that suggests that the apparat in question is diseased and needs to be liquidated.”

    The services being denied were the following:

    1. Braille instruction provided by the vision teacher of the public school under whose purview the child fell. I called the director of the special Ed dept of that local public school district & told her that a portion of the federal funds she was administering were provided for some services for students in the private schools within her district–that, if my student was not provided with Braille instruction with those funds the next school year, we were going to find out what she was doing with her money in detail. That director definitely did not want people who were being denied services looking into the details of how she spent her money. I also told the director that we were done talking–that we were going to be taking action from that point on. She had a meeting with the school attorney and the mother of my student wherein the public school district attorney verified that the mother would win any suit that was brought relative to the denial of services to her child. These two things “persuaded” the director to provide free Braille instruction to my student for 2 hours a week–which was not enough by the way-but I left it to the mother to fight for more after gaining that much ground.

  • Services denied continued:

    2 & 3. The local agency responsible to provide services to children with blindness/visual impairment across the state to children who did not attend the state school for the blind (and who did not have their own vision teachers) was denying the child requisite home visits & parental/student consultations/instruction as well as refusing to purchase needed equipment and supplies for the child from funds designated for that purpose. (Mary De Voe in this case the agency would lose any funds that they did not spend by the end of the year–they would save their money and go on spending sprees near the deadline for funds to be spent.)

    The second in command at the special Ed division of the state department of education in our state was ordering the director of the previously mentioned agency listed on this number to not provide my student services because he was in a private school–the mother was not shy about telling state bureaucrats that she wanted her children to gave a religious education–which was very much resented by the secular powers that be.

    Finally, after appealing every way I knew to these folks sense of deceny, responsibility, ethics, & professionalism and getting stonewalled-I told them that I would have my state senator deal with them regarding these matters and they knew that he would be very unhappy about it & that he was a very powerful senator on the state education committee with control over their salaries/budget.

    4. The 4th agency, the state school for the blind, at that time housed the large print and Braille book program that was responsible for the provision of Braille books to students who needed them all across the state. The superintendent of the school for the blind also refused to provide my student Braille books. I went through the same appeals of morals, ethics, etc & got no where. I knew that this superintendent had given a woman, whom it was reported he was having an affair with, several illegal raises in the past several years (she went from a $5 an hour secretarial pisition to almost $70,000 a year administrative position in a five year time span.). A friend did an FOIA request on the woman’s salary history–which I promptly wrote an evaluation on–copied–and placed in multiple state legislators boxes with whom I was familiar. Within about 48 hours, the director of the large print/Braille book program called the mother and offered to provide my student services.

    The only thing that brought about the provision of services by these agencies was the knowledge that they were going to have a spot light shown on their dirty activities–like the roaches they were–they ran from the light.

  • “…. yours is a tale that suggests that the apparat in question is diseased and needs to be liquidated.”

    I am completely convinced that 90% of our public educational power structures in our state/federal govts are so incompetent/cimmitted to pushing a destructive socialist liberal agenda on the rest of us while enriching themselves and their friends–that it is pointless to expect any other outcome from that apparatus than what we are currently receiving.

    True reform must take place outside the system.

  • BG writes, “…True reform must take place outside the system.”
    .
    John Dewey worked vigorously to plant the seeds of the present system.

  • “Thank you for fighting for equity. There is always a cost. Welcome to the small church blossoming anew.”

    Please pray for me, Mary De Voe. These battles for true freedom are very stressful. In my younger years, I was usually in only one at a time. Now, i seem to be in at least 2-3 at any one given time. My biggest concern is that sometimes I am doing unnecessary damage in these fights. I am willing to make enemies in order to take a stand–however I do not wish to make unnecessary enemies. Please pray that God will help me to be as wise as a serpent and as harmless as a dove.

  • “The problem is us, not the State.”

    David Spaulding, I agree 100%.

  • “We would not need state funding if the state and government did not take 50% of what we earn.”

    Exactly. And the educational bureaucracy at large is indoctrinating students to accept ever larger & larger of our incomes being given to the govt. Tax rates literally translate into freedoms or the lack thereof.

    Receipt of govt funds, directly, exerts govt control–always–sooner or later.

    The Bible clearly says that the godless powers of this world are ruled by Satanic powers (Ephesians 6.)

    By no means do I intend to indicate that people need to stop fighting for right within the given secular powers that currently exist–but to truly create authentic needed reform–one must go completely outside the existing secular systems where govt bureaucrats are constantly gaining more and more of a strangle hold on free thought and freedom in general. Christians are called to do battle in all realms. The only question is what contribution He wants us to make as individuals to the fight.

  • @BG, thank you for fighting the good fight.

    @Slainte, John Dewey? sssssss

    @Mary, today I had reason to remember that Catholic Charities is not waiting for me to give them my two mites to care for migrants and refugees. CC instead lobbies the government directly to take it from me by force of increasing taxes:

    We bump into an inconvenient truth about the USCCB Migration and Refugee Services. The last latest annual report from the MRS shows a total budget of just under $71 million, of which nearly $66 million—or nearly 93%—came from federal grants and contracts.

  • Tamsin writes: “….We bump into an inconvenient truth about the USCCB Migration and Refugee Services. The last latest annual report from the MRS shows a total budget of just under $71 million, of which nearly $66 million—or nearly 93%—came from federal grants and contracts.”
    .
    I guess $66 million in government welfare receipts is not enough.
    .
    http://ncronline.org/blogs/making-difference/unaccompanied-migrant-children-need-our-help

  • Tasmin wrote, “Catholic Charities is not waiting for me to give them my two mites to care for migrants and refugees. CC instead lobbies the government directly to take it from me by force of increasing taxes”
    Nothing new in that. It begins with an ordinance of Charlemagne, as King of the Franks, in a general assembly of his Estates, spiritual and temporal, in 778-779 – “Concerning tithes, it is ordained that every man give his tithe, and that they be dispensed according to the bishop’s commandment.” A Capitular for Saxony in 789 appointed tithes to be paid out of all public property, and that all men, “whether noble, or gentle, or of lower degree, should give according to God’s commandment, to the churches and priests, of their substance and labour : as God has given to each Christian, so ought he to repay a part to God.” A Capitular of 800 made the payment of tithes universal within the fiscal domain of the whole Frankish kingdom.
    From this time onwards, therefore, we may say the civil law superseded any merely spiritual admonitions as to the payment of tithes. Their payment was no longer a religious duty alone; it was a legal obligation, enforceable by the laws of the civil head of Christendom. No wonder the Pope Leo III greeted Charlemagne with the cry of “Life and Victory to the ever-august Charles, crowned by God, great and pacific emperor!”
    The dîme was abolished by the French Revolution in 1789.

  • So what do we do? Let’s get beyond filling the echo chamber with just clamor about being beholden to government largesse, our schools and charities failing to display the faith, our bishops and pastors failing to insist on better, and our Church’s collective failure to know and follow her teachings: what shall we do to restore the Faith in America? Should we join Low Protestant brethren in their call to tax religious institutions and eliminate all government funding of religious programs?

  • David, we as individual Catholics should voluntarily elect to tithe.
    .
    First fruits belong to God.

  • Recall then-Cardinal Ratzinger’s words in “The Church Will Become Small”:
    .
    “…. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, which is dead already, but the Church of faith…”
    .
    The Church that caused the European monarchies and governments to collect tithes for ease and efficiency is the “political cult” which Ratzinger recognized as being dead already.
    .
    We the faithful as members of the renewed Church of Faith must, mindful of God’s biblical mandate to tithe, should do so voluntarily, without coercion from any source other than our conscience. If we tithed the 10 percent first fruits to the Church, God would ensure that those funds would be sufficient for its survival and well being.
    .
    MPS, when the French Republic abolished delivering the tithe (the Dime) to the Church, it did so to financially cripple Her by depriving her of income. That coupled with the seizure of Church properties and the income derived from those properties collectively placed a stranglehold on the Church financially.
    .
    Once the biblically mandated tithe was “abolished” by the French state, in time comparable taxes were enacted, all of which were due and owing to the state to be distributed at the sole direction of the French Republic.
    .
    The French Revolution formed a Republic to destroy the Catholic Church; granting liberties to individuals was secondary but also part of the process to elevate man over God.
    .
    The renewed Church of Faith that Emeritus Pope Benedict foretold needs our tithes…even if it hurts us financially to part with much needed income.

  • “With respect, the Church in America was built by the poorest of the poor. Though living in tenements, they built cathedrals, seminaries, schools, convents, and orphanages and then filled them to the overflowing”

    3 principles that were at work here that I do not see at work in a lot of instances today:

    1. Faith: the Bible says that faith is the substance of things hoped for–the evidence of things not seen.

    These poor folks mentioned above had to have faith to do what they did because they were not capable of doung all of this on their own strength. Faith is the currency in the spiritual realm that makes things happen in the natural world. God sees faith, is pleased by it, and responds with His blessings, empowerment, and provision.

    2. Doing things in the power of the Holy Spirit. Zechariah 4:6b-9 shows the empowerment of the Holy Spirit working in the rebuiling of the temple in Jerusalem after a few Israelites returned from captivity with that purpose and found themselves having to work with their tools in one hand and a sword in the other. This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, said the LORD of hosts. Who are you, O great mountain? before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace to it. Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying,
    The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also finish it; and you shall know that the LORD of hosts has sent me to you.”

    3. Allowing God to take His proper position in our life and work. “You shall have no other gods before me.” I fear that in many instances where the govt is the major funding source for ministry that govt becomes god.

    Having Biblical faith, operating in the power of the Holy Spirit, allowing God to have His proper place in your life, and maintaining a repentant, pure heart before Him results in seeing God move in big and small things on a daily basis.

    We cannot say across the board that any ministry that receives govt funding is lacking the 3 things above because we do not know the hearts of individuals and God may choose to use government funding any time He wishes. We can say that given human nature it is easier to do the 3 things above when we are not regularly receiving huge amounts of money from the government and are not facing situations that we cannot handle in our own strength.

    When the next generation is brought up by adults who live out these 3 things before children in their daily lives–the children live and learn these 3 principles–those children then naturally carry the Faith into their own adult lives–and the process can repeat itself for generation after generation.

  • That is as excellent a summation as I’ve ever read. I’m printing it for meditation upon.

  • “Should we join Low Protestant brethren in their call to tax religious institutions and eliminate all government funding of religious programs?”

    The only reason that churches are currently allowing their speech to curbed as nonprofits is because of legislation passed by former president Lyndon Johnson (although I think it was passed before he became president.) Johnson was absolutely livid with church folks who were very vocal opponents against him in the political arena, and he worked to change things so that they would have to shut up or lose their tax exempt status. From colonial times, pastors freely said whatever they wanted, when they wanted, about whatever topic they wanted–including political topics. That is how our pastors helped to advance the cause of freedom into the bringing forth of the Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary War. Because of the First Amendment to the US Constitution and the right we have to practice our faith without govt intervention, the IRS nor any other govt agency has the true authority to tell a pastor what can be said or done in regard to any political topic from the pulpit of the church. The IRS has illegitimately usurped authority over the churches that the govt does not have. The restrictions on nonprofit churches that are currently written into our IRS code–illigitimate as they are–allow much more freedom than 99% of the American population realizes. If you should be interested in what the existing limits actually are please contact Dr. James Dobson’s Family Council and ask them to mail you one of their pamphlets on that topic. You may also be interested in doing some reading online about the modern day Black Robed Regiment (named for the organization of ministers and pastors who supported the American colonies during the American Revolution.) this group of modern day ministers have so cowed the IRS with their proactive “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” that an atheist group has recently sued and just settled with the IRS in an attempt to force the IRS into stopping the activities of the Black Robed Regiment.

    What I am going to say next will probably offend some folks, however it is the truth as I see it. Our churches in this country, IMHO, sold their soul to the Devil when they allowed the government to place any restrictions on religious speech. As a direct result, over time the church has said and took an active part in what really matters in our society less and less–until now the churches have completely lost their ability to change or impact culture. In the Protestant churches, in my direct experience, the leadership uses the muzzling of the IRS as an excuse to cower in silence while our society goes straight to Hell. I don’t have the space nor the energy right now to go through the examples of what has brought me to these conclusions. However let me plainly state the following points:

    1. If the govt can tell ministers/church/church members what they can and cannot do in their official capacities then the govt is the boss of them all–not Christ who is supposed to be the Head of the Church.

    2. Neither the IRS nor any other govt agency does not have legitimate authority to limit any speech by any church, church group, or church member–so the law allowing the restrictions on religious speech and the IRS codes based on the law should be done away with.

    3. Until the law is changed to provide the complete religious freedom allowed under our constitution, I would prefer that our churches and ministries pay taxes if necessary in order to not be muzzled and continue to be irrelevant to the culture at large as they currently are.

    4. What do you think God’s response will be to pastors, standing before Him in judgement, whose only excuse for not addressing the areas of societal decay in their lifetimes is that the IRS would have taken their tax exempt status from their church if those subjects had been addressed with their flock?

    5. Something that bothers me even worse than pastors allowing the IRS to muzzle them (and that REALLY REALLY bothers me) is the so called “ministries” that are formed as corporations yet function like they are a church on Sundays and Wednesdays.

    God did not call us to form a corporation nor a nonprofit! He called us to form a church! In the New Testament, if the saints would have allowed their respective governmental powers to tell them what they could and could not say, the Gospel may have never been spread throughout the known world of that time.

  • Elections have consequences.

  • I wrote: “If you should be interested in what the existing limits actually are please contact Dr. James Dobson’s Family Council and ask them to mail you a pamphlet on that topic”

    Please forgive my typos, triple negatives, etc. I am typing on my cell phone and cannot see but 3 lines at a time.

    I should have said “If you should be interested in what the existing limits actually are please contact Dr. James Dobson’s FOCUS ON THE FAMILY and ask them to mail you one of their pamphlets on that topic.”

    Focus on the Family is their national headquarters; Family Council is their state affiliate where I live. Both the national organization and their state affiliate is associated with a pro-Christian/pro-Family/pro-religious freedom legal group called liberty council that provides legal resources and representation on related topics (religious freedoms, etc.)

  • 501(c)3 status pretty much only prohibits direct, explicit endorsements of partisan candidates. 501(c)3 nonprofit status is not at risk if, for example, an Archbishop and President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops showed the courage to snub the pro-abortion party’s presidential nominating convention after leading prayers at their rival party’s confab. Nor does 501(c)3 status prohibit your pastor from using his homily to teach, in detail, the Church’s opposition to same-sex sham marriage and to exhort good Christians to deny their vote to politicians who support such abominations.

  • Barbara Gordon wrote, “God did not call us to form a corporation nor a nonprofit!.”

    And yet, historically, the law of corporations in the West begins with ecclesiastical persons. Jurists needed some way of explaining how land could belong to a bishop and his successors in office. It clearly did not belong to the individual bishop, for it was inalienable and imprescriptible and did not descend to his heirs. From this emerged the notion of the corporation sole, with the bishop and his successors forming one “moral person,” with “perpetual succession and a common seal,” as the feudal lawyers rather quaintly put it. With the erection of parishes, the rector, too, became a corporation, hence the common English name of “parson,” the persona ecclesiae, the embodiment of his church.

    Likewise, monks could not be treated as co-owners of their property, for an individual monk could own nothing and it is here that we find the germ of the corporation aggregate, with the monastery itself being seen as a moral person, distinct from the fluctuating body of members; it, too, had “perpetual succession and a common seal.”

    The fiscal implications of this can be seen by the voluminous writings of medieval jurists on“mortifications,” or land passing into the “dead hand” of the Church. Churches and religious houses were never infants and never died, so superiors lost the casualties of relief, non-entry and wardship

  • Wow, These are really great comments.
    .
    The church is a non-profit in that 51% of its donations, collections, tithes and behests are used for the immediate plant. The church is held in trust for all generations, those ancestors, those living now and the constitutional posterity to be born.
    .
    Separation of church and state dictates that the state cannot regulate how a church mission is fulfilled or religion is practiced. It is simply because the state, government of the people, cannot dictate to God the condition of our immortal human souls, the metaphysical, the spiritual part of our humanity and eternal life. Nobody knows. The government cannot know. Therefore, the government cannot write laws that intrude upon the metaphysical being at the heart of humanity.
    .
    Government must sustain the truth, the absolute and complete absence of evil tp deliver Justice. Therefore evil must be defined. Evil is metaphysical. Therefore, evil must be defined by the Church. To prohibit the free exercise of defining evil or virtue is unconstitutional. To tax the defining of good and evil by the church would be taxation without representation.
    .
    Priests do not forfeit their citizenship, nor do parishioners. Priests, ministers and parishioners pay their taxes as citizens. The church is composed of individuals who have already paid their fair share of taxes for one vote. Two taxes, one on the church, would be two taxes for one vote. But again, the IRS has nothing to say about the metaphysical, the immortal human soul, whose eternity is cared for by the church. “or prohibit the free exercise thereof” of the church’s relationship with God is unconstitutional and evil, an evil which is prohibited by government.

  • Let me add that atheism, denying the immortal human soul by denying God’s creation of the metaphysical human soul is unconstitutional. Government of the people functions through freedom, an attribute of the metaphysical human soul. Deny the metaphysical human soul and the atheist denies freedom.

  • “And yet, historically, the law of corporations in the West begins with ecclesiastical persons.”

    The law in the West (generally) exudes from the 5 Books of the Law written by Moses.

    MPS, before contracts there were covenants. In the Old Testament, God made the first recorded covenants (often blood covenants) with man (e.g. Abraham.) Then man began to make covenants with other men. God never breaks a covenant–of course fallen man does. Contracts are a weak version of a covenant. In a covenant, one side is responsible to continue their faithfulness even if the other side is unfaithful–hence the concept of the Catholic marriage covenant where there is no divorce. Secular marriages/civil marriages are contracts which can be easily broken.

    Europe has had a history of the church being one with the state. The US does not have such a history. Someone earlier in this thread mentioned that the civil govt of France attempted to make restitution with the church of France for stealing church property during the Humanist French Revolution–and then later the French govt refused to follow through with the agreed upon restitution to the church (again as a mechanism of controlling the church.)

    Churches can be formed in this country in any manner that can be conceived. Here in Arkansas there is a Baptist church that is not a nonprofit–they pay taxes–and have chosen to do so in order for their pastor to be able to speak from the pulpit in an unlimited fashion.

    The concept of personal property is at its root a religious concept. That is why dictatorial leadership must destroy the concept of personal property in order to accomplish their goals of complete control. The ownership of personal property is actually a statement about the existence of

  • Mary De Voe wrote: “Separation of church and state dictates that the state cannot regulate how a church mission is fulfilled or religion is practiced.”

    And yet that is exactly what the IRS code is doing–telling pastors what can and cannot be said from the pulpit–which by definition is regulating “how a church mission is fulfilled or a religion is practiced.” Let me say again that God call people to use whatever mechanism he chooses to minister–however here in the US pastors are regularly limiting themselves to no controversial subjects–subjects where the battles determining the survival or death of our society and ability to practice our faith–because of the illigitimate restrictions placed on them by an IRS nonprofit label. That is why the Freedom From Religion society (a very vocal, aggressive, radical group of atheists) is up in arms over the actions of the modern day Black Regiment pastors who will not allow their religious speech to be limited by an illigitimate law/rule/reg–and are directly challenging the IRS to do something about it.

    Mary, you also mentioned the supposed “separation of church and state” which is a completely separate can of worms that I do not have time nor space to get into here. 😉 Churches in America are not nonprofits in order to keep church and state separate–as the state explicitly has its nose up in the church’s business telling the church what can be said from the pulpit of a church. The federal law that was passed by Lyndon Johnson in the late 20th Century authorizing the limitations to be written into IRS code was not passed to enforce the separation of church and state–it was passed by Johnson as pay back to shut up his effective political opposition in the churches. The much vaunted phrase “separation of church and state”, before it was encoded into US Supreme Court rulings in the 20th Century, was just a phrase written in a personal letter by Thomas Jefferson in the 18th Century.

  • “God did not call us to form a corporation nor a nonprofit!.”

    MPS, I apologize for not qualifying that statement. I’m sure it seems very extreme and unworkable without any qualifiers. Please remember that my background is in the Protestant faith/practice. When I made that comment, in my mind I was thinking about several local and national ministries where individuals or families have started “ministries” as legal corporations and called them “churches.” I do not have a problem with a ministry being run by a family being a corporation. I do have serious qualms about it being called a “church.”

  • MPS,

    One more thought about the priests in the Catholic Church owning no property. There is an Old Testament precedent for such. The Levite tribe, the preists of that day and time in the Jewish Faith, was the only tribe (people) who did not own actual property. They strictly were reserved to minister before God for the other 11 tribes.

  • MPS wrote: “It clearly did not belong to the individual bishop, for it was inalienable and imprescriptible and did not descend to his heirs. From this emerged the notion of the corporation sole, with the bishop and his successors forming one “moral person,” with “perpetual succession and a common seal,” as the feudal lawyers rather quaintly put it. With the erection of parishes, the rector, too, became a corporation, hence the common English name of “parson,” the persona ecclesiae, the embodiment of his church.”

    Interestingly enough in preparation for lobbying for given bills in the last 4 years here in our state, I have seen the legal definition in state statutes of a nonprofit being explicitly designated the same as a “person” in the same statue with it being carried down from other previously passed statutes. At the time I thought the definition of a nonprofit being declared a person was a political shell game that strictly was done to benefit the powers that be and their political allies who wrote the legislation. Now I know there are entire centuries of history behind that legal definition. 😀

The “Removal of Existing Protections and Safety Measures for Women Undergoing Abortion Act”

Thursday, July 17, AD 2014

 

For Roman Catholics, the defense of life is a sine qua non, one that’s sadly missing form many politicians who self-identify as “Catholics.” To wit: Nancy Pelosi (C-CA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Vice President Joe Biden.

So, it’s refreshing when a politician defends life, especially at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing where the proposed bill—the “Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) (S.1696)—would block all restrictions on abortion. WHPA includes sweeping federal authority to preempt “any provision enacted by a state or subdivision.” Of course, the bill is a legislative response to the recent Hobby Lobby decision.

U.S. Representative Marsha Wentworth Blackburn (R-TN)

U.S. Representative Marsha Wentworth Blackburn (R-TN)

According to CNSNews.com, Congresswoman  Marsha Wentworth Blackburn (R-TN) stated in her comments: “Our Constitution does not put a qualifier on life.” Blackburn then held up a large, 3-D ultrasound image of her grandson. She continued:

And I have to tell you how exciting it was for me to see this ultrasound. I was thrilled. I could tell…three months before he was born, he had my eyes and nose. Now, for a grandmother, that’s a really big deal. I could see his hands. I could see his arms. And I could see him peacefully resting in his mother’s womb. That’s the wonder of science. That is life!

Our Constitution does not put a qualifier on life. The pursuit of life, liberty–pursuit of happiness. Those protections–the right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, (exist) even in the mother’s womb.

I urge the committee to reconsider this legislation.

As for the bill’s title, Blackburn said it’s misleading:

I find it so curious that this legislation is termed “The Women’s Health Protection Act.”  In my opinion it would be more accurately titled the “Removal of Existing Protections and Safety Measures for Women Undergoing Abortion Act.”

Kind of refreshing, isn’t it, to see an elected representative bringing the battle for life right into the Chambers? Would that every Roman Catholic member of Congress courageously promoted the cause of life, as does this member of the Presbyterian Church in America.

Pro-Life kudos to U.S. Representative Marsha Wedgeworth Blackburn!

 

 

 

To read the CNSnews.com article, click on the following link:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/rep-blackburn-constitution-does-not-put-qualifier-life

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

12 Responses to The “Removal of Existing Protections and Safety Measures for Women Undergoing Abortion Act”

  • Thanks Be To God!
    Congresswoman Blackburn defending unborn Life. Thank you M.M. for this story. Thank you for the Good-News.

  • Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn is no wimp…watch her take on former VP Gore by confronting him with evidence of self dealing via his undisclosed personal investments in a Cap and Trade scheme which would profit from his defense of “climate change”.
    .
    http://youtu.be/py6yay2c0Oo
    .
    Mothers and unborn babies are now the beneficiaries of her righteous efforts. Excellent work Marsha!

  • What is scary is the way they always choose a title for the law that is the opposite of what the bill really does. So, the “:Women’s Health Protection Act” really allows people to kill babies.

    When they refuse to tell you exactly what they are doing in the name of the bill, they are up to no good.

  • She lives up to the wonderful appellations of Mother and Grandmother and public Servant.

  • Gerald: I could (no probably am) be wrong. I see the act’s title as a euphemism as “Arbeit macht frei” was emblazoned on the gates of concentration camps. Birds of a feather . . .

  • Ms. Blackburn did a great job there! The baby is beautiful and she is beautiful to say what she said.

    Compare if an Elizabeth Warren or a Patty Murray had the guts to stand up with that same 3-D picture and state for the record, “Those protections — the right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness — DO NOT EXIST in the mother’s womb.”

    Too bad we can’t convince the Obama administration to grant refugee status to each female baby in danger of being torn limb from limb if she remains in her home uterus.

  • Great work Congresswoman! Having it be pictures of her own grandson makes it even better.

    Meanwhile, can we start calling this bill “The Kermit Gosnell Protection Act?”

  • I know it seems surprising that it took so long for this to happen considering how long we have had 3 D ultrasound, however there are often behind the scenes political manipulations taking place which keep such actions from happening in committee testimony. The public health committee, which was purposely loaded with liberal pro-abortion Democrats in order to vote keep pro-life bills from getting to the state house floor for consideration, in our state house during session of our state legislature 4 years back was headed by a woman named Linda Tyler-who is still proud of killing every single pro-life bill that came before her committee that session. The liberal Democrats knew that, if a pro-life bill made it out if committee to the full state house for a vote, that the pro-life bill might pass with a vote of the full house as there were many more balanced house members in the full state house and would have a much easier passage through the state senate and end up on our governor’s desk who would not have easily been able to explain any veto of such reasoned bills as were being run at the time. Therefore the decision was made to pack the publuc health committee with pro-abort Democrats so that all such bills died in committee. Tyler’s house committee even voted down a bill that would have outlawed abortions in which a medical doctor is not physically present but is directing an abortion procedure being carried out by a unqualified 3rd party via video feed. This type of abortion puts women at greatly increased risk IMHO-even more than normal. But back to the subject at hand–why testimony, such as that of US Rep. Blackburn re: her grandchild, had not occurred in the past before a political committee. The chair of a political commiittee is basically a dictator in their given committee meetings. Chairs determine who testifies, how long, when, what materials can be presented, etc. Tyler demanded that all materials to be passed out/presented be approved by herself in advance of the presentation of any pro-life bill (yes, a chair of a committee can do that.) Very positive, non-controversial video was blocked from presentation–as well as simple pics of a healthy baby in utero. Tyler wanted to make sure that her committee members were able to use the dehumanizing term, fetus, in committee without having to actually look at a pic of a “fetus”–I guess she thought it would be harder to vote to allow the killing of children in the womb unabated while looking at a pic of such a child. I would not have known of Tyler’s blocking of such presentations before her committee if it had not been for living in the same county with Andy Mayberry who, as a pro-life Republican, was presenting a pro-life bill before Tyler’s dreaded committee. Tyler for sure didn’t want Mayberry to present pics or video of his own sweet, disabled daughter before the public health committee–and basically banned Myberry from doing anything but talking during the presentation of his bill. The pro-abortion forces have great reason to fear any presentation by Mr. Mayberry or his wife. The Mayberrys could have presented beautiful pics of their own wheel chair bound daughter to the committee. While Mrs. Mayberry was carrying her daughter, the Mayberrys were advised by their doctor to abort this sweet child who is their youngest child because amniocentesis indicated that their daughter had spina bifida in utero. I have had the great pleasure of listening to Mrs. Mayberry speak before an Arkansas Right to Life Banquet te: her personal conversion from apro-abortion position to a pro-life position as a result of her struggles & prayers re: whether or not to abort her baby –who is now an absolutely beautiful teenager with gloriously beautiful, long blonde hair and a smile & laugh that is pure sunshine & joy. Mrs. Mayberry has been a well known, statewide news broadcaster, state wide pro-life speaker/advocate, founder of the first dance troop for children with disabilities in the state, and publishes a pro-traditional family weekly periodical. Prior to her husbsnd’s presentation of this particular pro-life bill during this legislative session,
    Mrs. Mayberry and her children had made more than one visit to the statehouse for various events & to meet their father for lunch. Children in the statehouse are a very common sight. Children under 10 in wheelchairs who are moving smilingly confident and freely independent about the state house are not a common sight–and are sure to attract every eye–which means that Tyler’s committee members most likely had seen and/or interacted with this joyful wheelchair bound wonder. I had the great pleasure of seeing the Mayberry’s daughter moving about in her chair and interacting with people at the state capitol-she never meets a stranger & charmed the pants off of people. 😀

    The rub is this: the party that has the majority in a given house or given senate chamber determines who chairs the committees that these bills must pass out if to get to be voted upon by the full house and full senate. The chair of a committee determines what testimony is presented in their committee and in what form that testimony may be presented. Hence Mrs. Blackburn’s testimony and pic of her grandchild were presented in the Republican majority US House of Representatives. This type of pic would most likely not have been allowed in the Democrat majority US Senate where pro-abort Democrats run the committees.

  • Mrs. Blackburn was testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee, as the post nots.

  • “notes…” Sorry for the typo.

  • “Mrs. Blackburn was testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee, as the post nots.”

    Thanks.

    I got to thinking about that over night and did not reread the post–assuming that because she was a US Rep that she must have been testifying in front of a US House Committee. Each session of our state legislature adopts its own unique rules. The state house votes it’s own unique set of rules, and the state senate as well. The party with the most members in each chamber obviously has the most influence on what those rules are. Those rules adopted along with the chairs of the committees, the membership makeup of committees, the makeup of entire chambers, the governor, and the plethora of shenanigans pulled in public and behind the scenes all determine the outcome on various sponsored legislation.

    I have no idea what the rules are for the US House or US Senate currently.

    At our statehouse, a committee does not meet unless a committee chair calls for a meeting and is present–with no exception to that to my knowledge. I do not know if the chair if this senate committee was even present at the time that US Rep Blackburn was testifying or had a someone chairing the committee. I also not know the customary rules re: testimony in Congress. In our small state, it is usually customary to let the committee chair know when someone testifying is going to need access to equipment for video feed, pics, etc. as the committee chair is responsible to provide access to the needed resources/equipment. That is how the testimony of the pro-life state rep from my county was reigned in by the rabidly pro-abortion chair of our public health committee. The pro-life state rep had made contact with the chair of the committee, Rep. Tyler to let her know he had video & large screen pics to present in his testimony for his bill. Hence Mrs. Tyler taking the ax to the testimony she did not want presented. The chair had insisted that ALL testimony to be given was provided for review to her in advance–which is an allowable but rarely used demand. Also, I have seen instances where no on cared what the opposition to the bill be presented says as the the votes to pass the bill are there–so no matter who says or shows what–the bill us going in to the full chamber in which case it isnt nexessarily worth it to ban given testimony and cause offence. In most instances, the chair of the committee does not know in total who will be testifying for or against a given bill until the committee meets and the witnesses actually sign up.

    Most likely, US Rep Blackburn was not asked to submit her complete testimony in full, for approval of the committee chair, before testifying. Also, no electronic format/media is needed to hold up a pic during ones testimony. It would seem to me to be much mote difficult at the national level. By the way, Linda Tyler, the former chair of our state house committee, lost her next race to a staunchly pro-life minister as she had been deceptive with her voters in her district regarding her position on abortion. The pro-life legislator who defeated her went on to pass limits on abortion in our state which was signed into law in 2013. 😀

Child trafficking: The political left’s silence borders on the outrageous…

Saturday, July 5, AD 2014

 

In a previous post concerning the topic of human trafficking and the political left’s seeming lack of interest in it, The Motley Monk observed:

This iteration of the global war on human trafficking is doomed to failure. Fueled by their hearts and not by their minds, the very people who decry human trafficking can’t seem to figure out whose policies sent an open invitation for human traffickers to practice their trade in the left’s own front yard…at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

With that in mind, The Motley Monk overheard U.S. Representative Louis Gohmert (R-TX) state on Saturday’s “Fox and Firends” that a federal judge had accused the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of participating in human trafficking.  That statement caught The Motley Monk’s ear, so he did a little investigating, finding that Representative Gohmert was 100% correct. His source was an article over at Townhall.com, written by Katie Pavlich and published nearly seven months ago on December 19, 2013. The headline: “DHS Complicit in Cartel Human Trafficking of Minors to Illegals Living in the United States.”

Hmmm…isn’t DHS responsible to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?

“But wasn’t that a long time ago?” many on the political left might ask.

Yes, it’s true that was a very long time ago.

Some might even protest: “What…does…it… matter…now?”

It matters very much now because DHS continues to participate in enabling cartel trafficking of minors, delivering them to illegals who live in the United States, and completing criminal transactions on behalf of illegal immigrants. This, despite a filing written by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas on December 13, 2012.

Pic_Human-Trafficking01

The case before Judge Hanen concerned Patricia Elizabeth Salmeron Santos, the mother of a 10-year-old El Salvadorean girl, who had been living illegally in Virginia after being denied legal entry into the United States in 2001. Salmeron Santos hired Mirtha Veronica Nava-Martinez, a resident alien living in the United States while travelling to and from Mexico, to smuggle the girl from Matamoros to Virginia. Nava-Martinez was caught at a Brownsville, Texas, border checkpoint.

Judge Hanen wrote:

Salmeron Santos admitted that she started this conspiracy by hiring alien smugglers to transfer her child from El Salvador to Virginia. She agreed to pay $8500 (and actually paid $6,000 in advance) for these human traffickers to smuggle her daughter). The criminal conspiracy instigated by Salmeron Santos was temporarily interrupted when Nava-Martinez was arrested. Despite this setback, the goal of the conspiracy was successfully completed thanks to the United States Government. This Court is quite concerned with the apparent policy of the Department of Homeland Security completing the criminal mission of individuals who are violating the border security of the United States.” (italics added)

According to Pavlich, what’s going on is that illegal immigrants who are living in the United States are paying human traffickers connected to Mexican cartels to smuggle their children into the United States.  How so? Judge Hanen writes:

Although Nava-Martinez [the smuggler] was arrested and charged, the minor was delivered to her mother living illegally in Virginia by DHS, automatically making the minor eligible for the President Obama’s DREAMers program. Further Salmeron-Santos, who illegally hired a human trafficker to smuggle her daughter across an international border, isn’t facing charges.

The DHS officials were notified that Salmeron-Santos instigated this illegal conduct. Yet, instead of arresting Salmeron-Santos for instigating the conspiracy to violate our border security laws, the DHS delivers the child to her—thus successfully completing the mission of the criminal conspiracy. It did not arrest her. It did not prosecute her. It did not even initiate deportation proceedings for her. This DHS policy is a dangerous course of action.

How dangerous? In his order, Hanen notes:

  • DHS encourages parents to “seriously jeopardize the safety of their children”;
  • DHS policy enables violent drug cartels, undermines efforts to deter criminal activity or further violations and lowers the morale of law enforcement agents working to enforce the law on the border.
  • Aliens being smuggled are “assaulted, raped, kidnapped and or killed.”

Obviously, the people running and working for these cartels are not the kind of people who staff the local Catholic Charities office. Hanen continues:

The cartels control the entire smuggling process. These entities are not known for their concern for human life….The Government is not only allowing them to fund the illegal and evil activities of these cartels, but is also inspiring them to do so. These men and women [law enforcement], with no small risk to their own safety, do their best to enforce our laws and protect the citizens of the United States. It seems shameful that some policymaker in their agency institutes a course of inaction that negated their efforts. It has to be frustrating to those that are actually doing the work of protecting Americans when those efforts are thwarted by a policy that supports lawmakers.

Judge Hanen likens the logic of the DHS policy to their agents seizing illegal drugs or weapons from smugglers and delivering those drugs or weapons to the criminals who initially solicited their illegal act of importing or exporting those drugs or weapons. Judge Hanen concluded: “DHS should enforce the laws of the United States—not break them.”

Unfortunately, as the number of immigrant children smuggled illegally into the United States by criminal cartels has increased exponentially since Judge Hanen filed his brief seven months ago, the President of the United States has evidently done nothing to direct his DHS to cease from participating in cartel human trafficking of minors to illegals living in the United States.

How’s that for social justice?

Why hasn’t the United Nations, the Holy See, and the Catholic Religious Orders and Congregations—all of whom who have be uniform in their condemnation of child trafficking—protested and condemned the Obama administration’s policy? After all it tolerates—if not requires—DHS to be complicit in cartel human trafficking of minors to illegals living in the United States.

Perhaps their silence is simply due to the mainstream media’s blackout concerning Judge Hanen’s filing.

 

 

 

To read The Motley Monk’s previous post, click on the following link:
http://the-american-catholic.com/2014/06/25/human-trafficking-in-the-usa-wheres-the-catholic-lefts-outrage/

To read Katie Pavlich’s article at Townhall.com, click on the following link:
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/12/19/dhs-complicit-in-cartel-human-trafficking-of-minors-to-illegals-living-in-the-united-states-n1765920

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

22 Responses to Child trafficking: The political left’s silence borders on the outrageous…

  • Begging the question – what is in this for the O Administration? It is not just getting more low information voters.

  • Unless it is openly and seriously challenged the strategy used by all tyrants like Hitler and others which works until they are overthrown is if you control the public media you can control the public’s mind and voting habits.

  • if you control the public media you can control the public’s mind and voting habits.

    They do not have to ‘control the media’. The Democratic Party is the electoral vehicle of the media and a half-dozen other economic and social sectors.

    Twenty-one years ago, The New Republic published an article with the title “Clincest” remarking on the web of social ties ‘twixt the administration, the broader Democratic establishment, and the press (with a special mention of the reporter husband of Judge Kimba Wood). The magazine presented it as something novel, not really present during the previous Democratic administration, and local to the social nexus around the Clintons. (Whatever you say about Jimmy Carter, a Washington establishmentarian he certainly was not). David Broder used to complain about newspaper columnists who had had positions in various administrations. Nowadays, the administration recruits its flacks out of the mainstream media, the administration’s patronage babies have first degree relations in the media, and George Stephanoplous holds court at ABC.

  • “Begging the question – what is in this for the O Administration? It is not just getting more low information voters.”
    .
    Anzlyne: Ignoring the problem and keeping citizens unaware of the problen let’s Obama focus our money and our votes on his own agenda, much in the same way Hitler behaved.

  • As Art Deco says, “… the administration recruits its flacks out of the main-
    stream media, the administration’s patronage babies have first degree relations
    in the media, and George Stephanopolous (sic.) holds court at ABC.”

    .
    I think the most egregious recent example of media and the (D)s playing footsie
    was last year’s hiring for the board at Wayside, a tech startup headed by then-
    Senatorial candidate Cory Booker. The new firm’s board included Twitter VP
    Katie Stanton, AOL executive Susan Lyne, former FEC Commissioner Trevor
    Potter, journalist Jeff Jarvis– and Andrew Zucker, the 15-year-old (!!!) son of the
    president of CNN.
    .
    Motley Monk, I can only speculate on why the UN, the Holy See and the various
    Orders and Congregations haven’t spoken out about this administration’s
    complicity in child trafficking. I’m not sure if the media’s lack of curiosity is
    a reason– or for some, just an excuse.

  • The United States has long been recognised around the world as an enabler of human trafficking of the most deplorable kind.

    In 2002 a case that shocked the country was heard in the French courts. An unmarried couple acknowledged as th3eir daughters twin girls, of whom they were the genetic parents, born to a surrogate mother in California. The Procurator of the Republic brought an action for reduction/improbation of the acknowledgement. On 4 July 2002, the Court of Appeal in Rennes set aside the acknowledgement of the girls by their genetic mother, on the grounds that “the mother is she who bears the child and gives it life, by bringing it into the world.” In a parallel ruling, the Conseil d’État declared the girls illegal aliens with no right of abode. It was noted that Californian law takes the opposite view; a jurisdiction in which, as the Procurator of the Republic mordantly observed, there appears to be a thriving market in babies, bespoke or prêt-à-porter.

    This remark was, doubtless inspired by the fact that a similar case, again involving twin girls born to a surrogate in California, was also wending its way through the French courts. In that case, the French married couple who had employed a surrogate and who were, once again, the girls’ genetic parents, had been, perfectly legally, recorded as the parents of the twins in their Californian birth certificates. The French court pronounced a decree of reduction/improbation of the certificates and the girls were denied right of entry.

    Over a decade before, on 31 May 1991, a plenary session of the Cour de Cassation, the highest civil court, had declared the plenary adoption of a child “a perversion of the institution of adoption” when this is only “the final phase of an overall process designed to enable a couple to take into their home a child conceived under contract and requiring that child’s abandonment at birth by his or her mother.”

  • Michael Paterson-Seymour: Surrogacy is total corruption of begetting new life, a new life, that parents and only the parents are entitled to beget. The total abandonment occurred when the life-giving parents contracted for a surrogate mother.
    .
    The child cannot be used to remedy a parent’s infertility. The child cannot be contracted out as merchandise (child labor laws) and disabused of its true parents.
    .
    In the case of Baby M, the child was awarded to the surrogate mother by the courts in New Jersey.

  • Sorry, Baby M was awarded to the Stern’s giving the surrogate mother visitation rights. However the child was Mary Whitehead’s from her egg. The court argued that giving $10,000 did not cover minimum wage if the surrogate mother was paid.
    Abraham Lincoln said : “One man cannot own another man.”Buying, selling and contracting out human flesh, eggs, sperm and other body parts, like DNA, makes comodities of the human person’s body, without their informed consent
    .
    It is necessary to obtain informed consent of the individual person concerned and exploited. The child, Baby M, could not give informed consent until she was eighteen years old. That the court had to decide her life, her future is a crime in itself.

  • Hello Motley,
    Silence? It seems to have gotten to the point where we can’t discuss immigration rationally within the Catholic Church, because one side has as its premise that borders exist and for a good reason, while the other side thinks borders should not exist and are illegitimate but they can’t say so directly so instead they cite Jesus without any limiting principle.
    Bishop Seitz is one who argues that the US should be to the Americas as the Rich Man was to Lazarus.
    Seitz says, Many today, when they look at public-policy issues, feel they need to separate out what their Judeo-Christian faith would tell them [as individuals?] from what they would propose for public action [by the government?] That should not be the approach for a person of faith.
    Seitz continues, Jesus is saying in no uncertain terms that we will one day be judged based upon how we have responded to the person in need at our door. Is it really a stretch to conclude that these desperate immigrants at our border are the Lazaruses of today? (Luke 16: 19-31)
    So, I will one day be judged as an individual by how I asked my government to collectively respond to Guatemalans at the border? So… I can go to hell for getting the answer wrong? As in, there is right and wrong? Seitz is bringing out the big guns here and he knows it, but without speaking to the premise of borders, and law. I feel like I’m trapped in a Les Mis performance and I can’t get out: Javert is a very, very, very bad man.
    But is it really individually virtuous for me to say “yes send them through!” and go back to bed, a thousand miles from the border? Perhaps Seitz should be calling on Catholics to take in one Guatemalan child each as their own, to feed and clothe and love and discipline them. Perhaps each Catholic parish throughout this great land (without borders!) should take in one busload of children this summer. And another busload. As fast as they can get here, I guess, fleeing violence in their homeland. Following Seitz’ logic, empty out Guatemala; bring them all here where they will be safe.

  • One sometimes gets the impression that purveyors of social teaching think all the world is an ecclesiastical economy where no one has measurable out put and the whole business runs on donations.

    Households and enterprises produce and exchange. They assemble in societies which have bonds of affiliation. Social institutions (of which political institutions are a dimension) are present to adjudicate, keep the peace, and mobilize, something very difficult to do with random assemblages of people with a deficit of affection or frames of reference in common.

    A country is not a welfare encampment. Guatemala is not and the United States is not; the residents of each have to produce what they are able to produce with the technology and organization they have mastered. Common provision is a phenomenon within societies; no contrivance has emerged to make it work between societies bar episodic disaster relief. You know that, I know that, but our bishops do not know that.

  • Art Deco wrote, “One sometimes gets the impression that purveyors of social teaching think all the world is an ecclesiastical economy where no one has measurable out put and the whole business runs on donations.”

    This is a fallacy that cuts both ways. One recalls that, in the 1950s, there were serious concerns, both in the UK and in the colony itself, that Hong Kong was being swamped by refugees from the mainland.
    A local UN official declared that Hong Kong could only survive through massive Western aid and the resettlement of the refugees elsewhere, the Press called Hong Kong a dying city, and the Foreign & Colonial Office entitled the lead chapter in their annual Hong Kong yearbook, “A Problem of People.”
    Today, Hong Kong supports a a population of about seven million people — more than five times the number the government declared to be Hong Kong’s optimum “carrying capacity” in 1954 and, so far from requiring foreign aid, it has long been one of the most dynamic economies in Asia

  • Clinton wrote: “Motley Monk, I can only speculate on why the UN, the Holy See and the various
    Orders and Congregations haven’t spoken out about this administration’s
    complicity in child trafficking.”

    One Catholic bishop has been busy testifying before Congress & denying that US governmental policy has little to do with the influx of the poor illegal children immigrants into the US. See link below for more info.
    http://www.cdom.org/CatholicDiocese.php?op=Article_140439425913495

  • Anzlyne wrote: “Begging the question – what is in this for the O Administration? It is not just getting more low information voters.”

    Liberal American truly have a self hatred complex. They believe and state through a myriad of means that America is the cause of all evils in the world –here in our own societies & in those abroad. America’s wealth and prosperity, in their thinking, has come at the expense of those who are down trodden in the world. From that frame if reference, as well as the redistribution of wealth/Communist framework, the downtrodden if the world have every right to come to America and take back what is theirs (what has been stoken from the downtrod by the US) by any means necessary. Liberals truly believe that they are doing the righteous and just thing by bringing these children here in this manner.

    Please note: just as the suicide of an individual is the result of self hatred…the deliberate suicide from within by the US is driven to a large degree by the overwhelming guilt liberal Americans feel for having a good life in our country that is not shared by others around the globe. Rather than work to improve the lives of the poor in other countries through legitemate Christian compassion, Liberals self hatred drives them to destroy their own society.

  • Today, Hong Kong supports a a population of about seven million people — more than five times the number the government declared to be Hong Kong’s optimum “carrying capacity” in 1954 and, so far from requiring foreign aid, it has long been one of the most dynamic economies in Asia

    Hong Kong is less densely settled than the five boroughs of New York and less densely settled than was New York in 1949. It is a city-state which earns its living from industry and services and requires intense engagement in networks of international trade. Referring to a ‘carrying capacity’ would be nonsensical unless you expected Hong Kong to receive its caloric intake or its energy from domestic production.

    Your refugee flows would have been composed of Han Chinese and to this day 93% of the population counts as Han Chinese. I do not doubt that there are internal fissures within populations of ethnic Chinese, some of which may have generated alienation and irritation (say over vernacular language or confession or simply inter-regional rivalries). However, you still have an over-arching bond between host and migrant that is not present in the circumstances under discussion. Also, Han migrants to Hong Kong were participants in what qualifies as nearly the most rapid experience of economic modernization in human history. Guatemalans arriving at our border are arriving in an affluent society which has the growth rates of a country on the technological vanguard (i.e. slow growth). They are arriving in circumstances wherein they can be used as cannon-fodder in the social and political battles which have been taking place in this country over five decades.

    Guatemala needs to get its land titles in order, to make primary education and agricultural extension more prevalent and intensive, to scrape away mercantilist controls on economic activity, and to build and maintain a police force, a prison system, and a court system sufficient to establish a quantum of public order apposite for a prosperous and civilized society. Exporting its people to California is not a means to those ends.

  • Art Deco wrote, “Guatemala needs… to make… agricultural extension more prevalent and intensive”

    Great care would be needed in such a very sensitive region. Akazul, a UK not-for-profit Community Interest Company, amongst others, is currently working to protect Guatemala’s costal ecosystem, where biodiversity is under threat, as it is in the area round Lake Atitlan in the Guatemalan highlands.

    The Holy Father’s remarks on forestry reported today are very much in point

  • Pingback: Abolish Child Trafficking: Close the U.S. Borders! | Top US News Today
  • I want to write something that is going to sound very blunt. There is just so much hypocrisy over this issue, and let’s just ignore the U.S. political and religious leaders who are pandering and focus on our Latin cousins.

    It is unbelievable that so many people from Latin America, and in particular Central America, are sending their children north in this manner, especially when many do not support international adoption of their children. What does it say about them as parents? The best thing is ‘desperate’, but others less kind come to mind. Furthermore, what does this say about them as citizens of their counties? It says that they have decided their countries are failures, that their only hope for their children is to go to a better place, but they lack the humility to say so publicly and to do the only honest thing, which would be to get their leaders to apply for U.S. statehood. There are many options for them, but their pride keeps them from doing all but the trafficking. How sad!

    If I had the mentality of a Roman emperor (which thankfully I don’t), I’d let these kids into the U.S., put them in camps, teach them to deride those who abandoned them, give them arms and training, and then send them back to invade and conquer their homelands so they could have the chance to make them better. It might not be Christian justice, but by other measures it certainly would be.

  • If I had the mentality of a Roman emperor (which thankfully I don’t), I’d let these kids into the U.S., put them in camps, teach them to deride those who abandoned them, give them arms and training, and then send them back to invade and conquer their homelands so they could have the chance to make them better. It might not be Christian justice, but by other measures it certainly would be.

    And that repairs Central American land titles just how? Enhances the prevalence of depth and schooling just how? Improves public order just how? Central America’s problems are the sort which require assiduous institution building, not regime change.

  • “And that repairs Central American land titles just how? Enhances the prevalence of depth and schooling just how? Improves public order just how? Central America’s problems are the sort which require assiduous institution building, not regime change.”
    Thank you Art, for showing just why no one should think like a Roman Emperor. I couldn’t have done it better myself.
    I think my point on U.S. statehood stands. If, say, Honduras were to approach the U.S. and offer to enter the Union with the understanding that the U.S. will help it build the sort of institutions that work, it would be a more honest and effective means of “erasing the borders” that what we are currently doing. Heck, Honduras might just become the next nest for snowbirds. The economy might really take off. Honduran kids could move back and forth just like any other American kids. The only thing stopping us is pride.

  • TomD & Art Deco
    If acting like a Roman Emperor meant introducing Roman Law, that would certainly solve the issue of land titles and much of commercial law, too. Many countries are signing up to uniform conventions on international carriage and even international sales and these are all thoroughly Roman.
    By the by, the first universal land registration system in the world (the Register of Sasines) was established in Scotland, under Civilian influence in 1617 and worked even with the complexities of a feudalised system.
    A modern adaptation of the Civil Law, like the Code Napoléon of 1804 or the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch of 1901, would be a good starter. Both Japan and Turkey introduced Civil Codes from Europe and they transplanted very well.

  • I have spent extended periods of time in Honduras. One of my favorite visits was to a humungous! banana plantation/industrial site that provides the US grocery stores with Chiquita bananas. In order for those plantations to run successfully & turn a profit, the Honduran administrative leadership had to be replaced with American administrative leadership from early on. It was fine to have Honduran workers. It did not work to have Honduran administrative leadership. The Honduran culture as a whole has no sense of being on time/deadlines–and no one seems to get upset about it except us crazy gringos!!

  • My point being in the comments above–there are huge cultural differences in the countries under discussion that impact their current poverty levels and their abilities to be raised out of poverty.

The “Director” of Inclusion and Diversity: The notion of “sexual minorites” in U.S. Catholic higher education…

Tuesday, July 1, AD 2014

 

In their unbridled lust to prove to the world they are inclusive and diverse institutions not parochial and doctrinaire institutions, many of the nation’s Catholic universities and colleges are “putting the money where their mouths are” and “walking the talk.” How so? By imitating their secular counterparts and expanding the already bloated number of high-ranking administrators to include the position of “Director of Inclusion and Diversity.”

When all’s said, done, and hired, that’s probably a $150-200k/year additional personnel expense, excluding associated operating expenses, all for the bragging rights to claim: “[We strive] to be an inclusive and diverse community that educates and cares for the whole person.” A quick calculation suggests that’s about 4 fully-paid tuitions at many Catholic institutions of higher education.

The most recent Catholic institution seeking to fill this position is St. Joseph’s University in Philadelphia. As advertised, the individual holding this position:

  • is responsible for providing institutional leadership to create and sustain a culture that embraces and promotes diversity and inclusion in their broadest meanings; and,
  • defines, assesses, and nurtures diversity and inclusion as institutional resources that support and enhance the mission of Saint Joseph’s University.

What possibly might that mean?

Actually, there’s no need to hazard a guess. The position description states this individual will evidence a “nuanced, broad, and sophisticated understanding of diversity and inclusion issues.” In addition, this individual will “be culturally sensitive to racial/religious/cultural/sexual minorities that present themselves as part of the campus community.”

While The Motley Monk “gets” the notions of racial/religious/cultural minorities that present themselves as part of a campus community in the broadest sense, what’s this notion of “sexual minorities”? Demographically, there’s one sexual minority globally. It’s the male sex.

Adam and Eve in garden

The Douay Rheims version of Genesis 5:2 states:

He created them male and female; and blessed them: and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

Perhaps something got lost in the translation…of the word Catholic, as in “As Philadelphia’s Jesuit Catholic University….”

 

 

 

To read the job posting, click on  the following link:
https://jobs.sju.edu/postings/11338

To read the mission of Philadelphia’s Jesuit Catholic University, click on the following link:
http://www.sju.edu/about-sju/mission-statement

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

7 Responses to The “Director” of Inclusion and Diversity: The notion of “sexual minorites” in U.S. Catholic higher education…

  • That’s quite a photo of Eden, MM. Makes you understand why the apple got bit.

  • “Higher education” is now a synonym for ‘latrine’.

  • Neo-Gnosticism is becoming the new orthodoxy in certain academic institutions

  • Diversity is a growth industry! Race, ethnicity, gender, disabilities, lesbian, gay, bisexual transgender… all in need of for special rights and protections. That would be a good thing to major in at college- could have quite a long career ahead with a degree in Diversity and Inclusion!

  • Better to give kids $40,000 in cash and let them travel the world for a year…than to waste (worse than waste) 4years or more at a leftist indoctrination center.

    They’ll get a much better education and you’ll save a ton of money.

  • All the best Catholic high schools have a diversity director nowadays.

    If nothing else, the demand for participation in league sports will make it impossible for Catholic high schools to hold out with anything other than nondiscrimination policies written to meet or exceed public schools policy statements. A diversity director shows off your heart is really in it!

    It’s been over ten years since our local public school districts adopted non-discrimination policies that listed “gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression”. At the time, how could anyone object? There were no ramifications, yet. At most, people felt regret when a child was confused about his or her sexual orientation; gay marriage had been defeated in a statewide referendum; nobody had seen an episode of Will and Grace; Lady Gaga had not yet performed “Born This Way”; and accommodations for transgender kindergarteners were still nowhere in sight. Objecting to the policy change then would have seemed mean-spirited and excessive.

  • The American concern with “diversity” and “inclusion,” is almost unintelligible to Europeans.

    The French approach, for example, is to draw a rigid distinction between « l’éspace public », the domain of the state, its agencies and its citizens and « l’éspace privé » the domain of civil society, private individuals and organizations, between « la personne » the bearer of rights and duties and « l’individu » the private individual.

    Individual differences, whether of race, religion, culture, gender or the like, are relegated to « l’éspace privé » , not in order to restrict them, but in order to exclude their intervention in, or impact on, the relations between the citizen and the public authorities. This excludes discrimination on the one hand and special accommodation on the other, for, if special rules are applied to different classes or categories of citizens, on the basis of such distinctions, how then is the republic one and indivisible?

    The debates around « l’affaire du voile » [the headscarf business] and the oft-expressed concerns in the media over « communautarisme », by which they mean ethnic or religious solidarities and allegiances that threaten to override republican unity, as the fruitful source of all social ills are very instructive, as Googling (is that a word?) these two expressions will reveal.

Human trafficking in the USA: Where’s the Catholic left’s outrage?

Wednesday, June 25, AD 2014

 

Judging solely from the amount of time international organizations—like the United Nations and the Holy See—have been devoting to it, human trafficking appears to be an another example of the old observation “their hearts in the right place, but their minds are in the wrong place.”

Consider the United Nations. Recently, it declared the moral equivalent of a global war against human trafficking. Yet, this is nothing new, despite the mainstream media’s interest in promoting it:

Even the Holy See appears to be smitten with this misguided notion. For example, the Holy Father met with the Archbishop of Canterbury a couple of weeks back. According to the Independent, the two agreed to:

  • a joint project that will utilize the global reach of their churches to combat the global trade in human trafficking;
  • pressure 50 top multinational companies to free their supply chains of forced labor by 2020; and,
  • “slavery proof” investments as well as the purchases of churches.

With more than one century’s worth of white papers, jetting here and there to convene high-level conferences, international agreement after international agreement, the question is: What’s there to show for the effort? The evil has grown into a $150B+ global industry that Kevin Bales in his 2004 book, Disposable People, estimated to involve 27M human slaves. Today, some believe it’s 35M.

So much for caring. It doesn’t win global wars.

Given these facts, when it comes to global trafficking in human beings, the left’s outrage de jour and #hashtag diplomacy isn’t just mindless. It’s also insincere. Sincere people would have been marching on the White House as far back as 2012 when President Obama bypassed Congress and stopped the certain deportation of illegal aliens. Instead, the President granted work permits to ~800k younger illegal aliens.

That policy opened the floodgates for an unprecedented number of illegal alien children to be imported into the United States. The facts:

  • In FY 2013, Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement (HHS-ORR) served ~24.7k children, almost double the ~13.63k from the previous year.
  • In FY 2014, ~60k children are expected to come to the United States. Most will be from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. That’s a 243% increase!

This iteration of the global war on human trafficking is doomed to failure. Fueled by their hearts and not by their minds, the very people who decry human trafficking can’t seem to figure out whose policies sent an open invitation for human traffickers to practice their trade in the left’s own front yard…at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

 

 

 

To read the Independent article, click on the following link:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/could-the-archbishop-and-the-pope-really-reunify-the-church-9552879.html

To read the International Labour Office’s 2014 statistics “Profits and Poverty,” click on the following link:
http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—ed_norm/—declaration/documents/publication/wcms_243391.pdf

To read the Boston Globe article about President Obama’s policy, click on the following link:
http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/06/15/president-obama-let-children-illegal-immigrants-avoid-deportation/andhGTWZtcf35T21dzq0nI/story.html

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

16 Responses to Human trafficking in the USA: Where’s the Catholic left’s outrage?

  • “This iteration of the global war on human trafficking is doomed to failure. Fueled by their hearts and not by their minds, the very people who decry human trafficking can’t seem to figure out whose policies sent an open invitation for human traffickers to practice their trade in the left’s own front yard…at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.”

    Human trafficking takes a decided backseat in the minds of the left in this country, along with depressing wage levels by having hundreds of thousands of desperately poor people taking any job they can get, to the prospect of future Democrat voters down the line. When it comes to illegal aliens, racial identity politics and crass political considerations, rather than a rational policy on immigration, rules the day.

  • Pingback: Spanish Speaking Pope Has Vatican Racing to Learn Spanish
  • Effectively countering human trafficking is going to be nasty.

    For starters, it might involve noticing and acting on how many of the young girls hitting our borders have been basically sold as sex slaves.

  • My wife and I have helped a victim of human trafficking, providing our place to stay and what little else that our situation allows us to do. I cannot say more than that at a public forum.

    The current government and the left-wing-nut Katholycks are useless for they simply reject such a person in need. They are too good to get their hands dirty by “condescending” to a poor person’s level. I have nothing but disgust, disdain and contempt for the lot of them. They expand the size of government for their damnable social justice programs that help no one and through taxation they remove the private citizen’s ability to actually do something positive to help someone in need.

    I hate – absolutely, totally and completely hate – the gospel of social justice, the common good and peace at any price dispensed by an omnipotent, omniscient government. Let them leave my wife and me alone so that we can do some good for a person in need, and so that maybe we can save a few pennies for ourselves. Oh, but we are so selfish for that. Strange. Things like this don’t bother my wife. She could care less what left-wing-nuts think and she can’t be bothered to waste emotional energy on hating. Of course, she is sane and I am not.

  • Human trafficking is not illegal when the president does it. 🙁

  • Let me say this again. It is incumbent for a citizen to protect a minor child, to give her food and shelter and an education if possible, even when she throws herself at a man for sexual gratification, or any other human need. This is why “We, the people” have constituted government, and why “We, the people,”need our guns to preserve our government, liberty and peace.

    Young boys and girls will be fed into the prostitution trade.

  • “But don’t overlook their right to freely choose their own sexual lifestyle” many a liberal would deplorably say.

  • tamsin: “Human trafficking is not illegal when the president does it.”
    .
    Don’t look now, but the “president”, Obama, and the HHS Mandate has made prostitutes of us all.

  • Silly people! Don’t you know that to a liberal (of any religious persuasion or none,) it is not the actoual results from their actions or lack thereof that are important–it is that they “care,” “give lip service to” & “mean well.”

  • Thank you, Paul W. Primavera for – “Of course, she is sane and I am not.” May I put the phrase to domestic use, without the need to ascribe? I remember Bob Dole asking during the 1996 campaign, “Where’s the outrage?” Tell him it’s right here in my heart and soul. By the Grace of God, I try to “use my temper, not lose my temper” a phrase I hereby ascribe to Father Rutler.

  • In 2006, by Loi n° 2006-399 du 4 avril 2006, France introduced some important measures to address human trafficking.
    Firstly, the age of marriage for girls was raised from 15 to 18 (Art 144) although the Procurator of the Republic can grant a dispensation for grave reasons (Art 145)
    Secondly, the law on coercion was clarified, making it clear that « crainte révérencielle envers un ascendant » [reverential fear towards an ascendant] nullifies a marriage. « crainte révérencielle » a phrase borrowed from the Canonists, means fear of giving offence to a parent or grandparent, out of filial piety, as opposed to fear of consequences for oneself or another. The public prosecutor can bring an action for a declarator of nullity on the grounds of want of free consent at his own instance (Art 180)
    These laws apply to French citizens anywhere in the world, as well as to all marriages celebrated in France.

  • Just read a fantastic book on this subject. Philip Cameron wrote They Call Me Dad, all about his work with orphans in Romania and other places. Most of them are used in human trafficking. It’s a global epidemic and it’s men like him who are doing their part to help these kids. http://www.stellasvoice.org/they-call-me-dad/, this is his site, worth a look, his story will change you.

  • In our 2013 Arkansas General Assembly a law was passed to assist in fighting human trafficking here in our state & across our country. Please note that the 2013 legislative session is the first general assembly in my life time (48 years) where the Republicans had control of both the state house & the state senate. The main sponsor, & driving force behind the bill, was Rep. David Meeks who is a fundamentalist Protestant Christian preacher and lay leader in his church. I know David and his grief over the suffering of those suffering in this slavery was evident in the precedings of the passage of the law & also since then. David is arguably the most conservative member of the entire state legislator in every sense of the word. It is interesting that I cannot ever recall the issue of human trafficking even coming up in a legislative session where the Dimocrats were in charge.

  • Pingback: Child trafficking: The political left’s silence borders on the outrageous… | The American Catholic
  • Good news in Minnesota regarding human trafficking: US 3rd Congressional District Minnesota Representative Erik Paulsen (R) got important ‘safe harbor’ legislation passed recently that prevents communities from treating young girls who have been forced into prostitution from being prosecuted. Communities are now required to treat them as victims, giving them hope for a way out of abusive situations and a promise for better futures. God bless Representative Paulsen.

“The candidate was simply too Catholic”…

Wednesday, June 11, AD 2014

 

For the past several decades, an ideological battle has been transpiring somewhat “beneath the radar” at religiously-affiliated universities and colleges throughout the United States. What’s being contested is control of what an institution’s “religious affiliation” means in the conduct of educating young adults.

In many institutions, the battle has focused upon controlling  of the board of trustees. Conservatives and liberals have vied for control to appoint presidents who will enact their religious views campus wide. Once the president is appointed, the focus of battle then shifts to the appointment of administrators—provosts, deans, and department chairs—who are intimately involved in hiring new faculty and granting/rejecting tenure and promotion in the professorial ranks. Of course, the overall objective is to control what students will experience of an institution’s religious affiliation in classrooms and through on-campus activities.

As this battle has been playing out most recently at Erskine College in South Carolina, the institutions’ Board of Trustees was concluding a presidential search when the board’s choice—a Christian college vice president—withdrew from consideration. Why? He was Baptist not Presbyterian.

Some background:

  • Erskine is a small liberal arts college, the only one affiliated with the Associate Reformed Presbyterian (ARP) denomination. ARP is a branch of the Presbyterianism that’s closer in beliefs to the many evangelical Christian denominations, meaning that Erskine tends to be more “conservative” than other, more “liberal” Presbyterian colleges.
  • In the past, Erskine’s board has hired presidents who were not ARP members. But, the board has never hired a non-Presbyterian.

What makes this particular candidate’s withdrawal noteworthy is that Erskine has been caught in a cultural struggle for years. At issue is how closely Erskine will adhere to a conservative worldview that treats the Bible as history and as a guide for all academic subjects and campus conduct.

According to Inside Higher Ed, this particular battle has been brewing since 2010—about the same time Erskine’s board was involved in a previous presidential search—as ARP conservatives began bringing pressure to bear upon Erskine’s board. Some alumni, students, and faculty members—who value Erskine’s liberal arts tradition—have been chagrined.

As the current presidential search was nearing its conclusion, ARP Talk—a blog that has led the criticism of Erskine’s board and administration in recent years for what ARP conservatives believe is the institution’s deviation from church teaching—took the institution to task. As reflected in a post about the now-failed search, what Erskine’s conservatives want this time around is a president who will:

  • affirm the inerrancy of the Bible;
  • affirm the historicity and special creation of Adam;
  • work to maintain and strengthen the institution as an “agency” of the ARP denomination;
  • address sexual impurity on campus; and,
  • take fiscal responsibility by reducing the draw on the endowment to 5% immediately.

These are sound, conservative religious, moral, and economic principles, the first four of which fly in the face of how liberals today define the term “liberal arts tradition” while the fifth means cutting programs and, potentially, faculty positions.

For decades, similar litmus tests—but from the opposite direction—have been administered in the nation’s Catholic universities and colleges. Boards and officials in the religious orders sponsoring those institution have been carefully vetting candidates for presidencies—whether religious or lay—for their religious ideology. The objective is to appoint liberal Catholics. Then, once  a president is appointed, this litmus test is applied even more stringently at the Provost and Dean levels, so these upper- and mid- level administrators will implement that agenda, protecting academic freedom and use their ideological agenda to guide decision making concerning all academic subjects and campus conduct.

As for Erskine’s failed search, ARP Talk states:

They put a good and honorable man through an unnecessary ordeal and in an untenable position! In all fairness, this candidate possesses a charismatic personality, a warm evangelical testimony of faith, and many admirable leadership skills. And the gentleman is not faulted because he is a convinced Baptist. A little background search on the Internet reveals his theological convictions, and he is forthcoming in what he believes. We can only wish he were Presbyterian in his theological convictions.

At too many of the nation’s institutions of Catholic higher education, the statement could be shortened considerably: “The candidate was simply too Catholic.”

 

 

 

To read the Inside Higher Ed article, click on the following link:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/06/02/erskine-struggles-find-president-who-meets-its-religious-requirements#ixzz33TnuZwNg 

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard.jacobs.blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

23 Responses to “The candidate was simply too Catholic”…

  • “As reflected in a post about the now-failed search, what Erskine’s conservatives want this time around is a president who will:
    • “affirm the inerrancy of the Bible;”
    .
    Holy Scripture is the Truth and inerrant. The translation and interpretation may be heretical. Who is interpreting?
    .
    •”affirm the historicity and special creation of Adam;”
    .
    The soul of Adam and of all human beings is created and ensouled at fertilization of the human egg. The rational, immortal human soul is Christ’s kingdom “not of this world.” If man’s body came from the ape through evolution, man’s body is guided through evolution by Divine Providence. The human person is an individual substance of a rational nature. Reason and Faith are united in the human being. Man’s rational nature admits of man’s immortal human soul and of his Creator. Faith in his Creator is man’s rational nature’s response to God and man’s own body and soul.
    .
    • “work to maintain and strengthen the institution as an “agency” of the ARP denomination;”
    .
    Evidence of cooperation and loyalty.
    .
    • “address sexual impurity on campus; and,”
    .
    The human person is created in moral and legal innocence, a virgin. It is the duty of the state to protect the person’s sovereignty and innocence. Any money from the state, given or loaned to individual students can only be used to promote this protection “and to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” From the Constitution’s Preamble, the unchangeable purpose of our Law of the Land.
    .
    • “take fiscal responsibility by reducing the draw on the endowment to 5% immediately.”
    .
    I do not know about things like this but I do know that thrift, wisely exercised, provides for the next generation.

  • Only a short few years ago (4 to be exact), I was invited as a candidate to a well-known SF Bay Area institution of higher learning for an introductory interview for a position. The meeting with the faculty department head went very well, then, no followup. I later found out through a contact that wondered why that the department head candidly commented to him, “Well, he is a very capable candidate. But I just don’t know how him being a practicing Catholic will work with our institutional environment here.” Unbeknownst to me, the outline of my Carmelite scapular he discerned peeking out behind my tie and silhouetted against my white shirt (he told my friend and contact that he recognized it), and that was enough for him to make up his mind.
    Next interview I will be a shoo-in: I will be wearing a Muslim taqiyah (skullcap) and jubba dishdasha (cassock-like outer attire).

  • Interesting statement: “address sexual impurity on campus”. Note that it is not worded as a lofty positive goal to be reached, but rather as a real negative problem to be countered. Practical motives often work better than idealism.

  • Motley – I’ve spent most of the afternoon slamming people online that I disagree with. So at the risk of slamming someone I agree with, are you sure that this was the best possible headline for this article?

  • Affirm the inerrancy of the Bible
    .
    “For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true.” Providentissimus Deus, Pope Leo XIII
    .
    Affirm the historicity and special creation of Adam
    .
    When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.” Humani Generis, Pope Pius XII
    .
    Work to maintain and strengthen the institution as an “agency” of the ARP denomination
    .
    “Teachers and administrators, whether in universities or schools, have the duty and privilege to ensure that students receive instruction in Catholic doctrine and practice. This requires that public witness to the way of Christ, as found in the Gospel and upheld by the Church’s Magisterium, shapes all aspects of an institution’s life, both inside and outside the classroom. Divergence from this vision weakens Catholic identity and, far from advancing freedom, inevitably leads to confusion, whether moral, intellectual or spiritual.” Meeting with Catholic Educators, Pope Benedict XVI
    .
    Address sexual impurity on campus
    .
    No adultery (Exodus 20:14; Deuteronomy 5:18)
    No lusting after another (Matthew 5:27-28)
    No fornication (1st Corinthians 6:9-10, 15-20)
    No homosexuality (Romans 1:18-32; 1st Corinthians 6:9-10)
    .
    Take fiscal responsibility by reducing the draw on the endowment to 5% immediately.
    .
    “Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.” Romans 13:8

  • Steve Phoenix.

    Funny but sadly true.
    Our Lady of Mt. Carmel will never let you down.

    Thanks for your story.
    (Muslim attire next time…No way 🙂 )

  • Thank you, Paul W. Primavera for your scholarship. It is indeed necessary. I was referring to when the NAB was printed without the Lord’s Prayer reading “Our Father Who art in heaven” and had to be revised as the NABRE.
    .
    “Holy Scripture is the Truth and inerrant. The translation and interpretation may be heretical. Who is interpreting?”
    .
    The Catholic Church is the interpreter of Holy Scripture. One can see how off the Mark the Muslims have the Koran.

  • Pingback: Super Model Gives Up Career To Become Nun - BigPulpit.com
  • Recent events at Notre Dame make sense in the light of Motley Monk’s
    article. In 2011 a Notre Dame Trustee and alumnus Roxanne Martino was
    discovered to have a long history of substantial contributions to pro-abortion
    groups Emily’s List and the Chicago Foundation for Women (which partners
    with Planned Parenthood). Martino later resigned her trusteeship.
    .
    In May of this year, a new member of the Notre Dame Board of Trustees,
    alumnus Katie Washington, was shown to have been the co-author of a 2012
    editorial in the Baltimore Sun criticizing US Catholic bishops resisting
    the HHS mandate, calling contraception and ‘women’s health care’ a “human
    right” and dismissing the bishops’ 1st Amendment arguments against the
    mandate. (Notre Dame is currently suing for exemption from the HHS mandate
    its newest Trustee is advocating…).
    .
    In the cases of Martino and Washington it was Catholic watchdog groups like
    the Cardinal Newman Society and the Sycamore Society who did the due
    diligence on the Trustees. Notre Dame administrators either did not care to
    find out, or didn’t feel those backgrounds disqualified those Trustees from
    their appointments.
    .
    As a Sycamore Society representative recently said, “it is hard to believe that,
    after the embarrassment of the appointment as Trustee of a contributor to
    the pro-choice cause a couple of years ago, the Notre Dame board would
    misfire again with the appointment of a public opponent if the university’s
    and the Church’s stand against the abortifacient/ contraceptive mandate.
    Ms. Washington should have the good grace to resign or the Board should
    force her to”.

  • It would be interesting to examine the charters of these Catholic institutions.

    In Scotland, we had the famous case of Bannatyne v Overtoun ([1904] AC 515) where a small minority of the Free Church (the “Wee Frees”) successfully claimed the whole property and endowments.

    Some of the dicta would appear to apply equally well to a university, mutatis mutandis, as the lawyers say.
    Thus, Lord Halsbury LC allowed “the right of any man or any collection of men, to change their religious beliefs according to their own consciences” but insisted that “when men subscribe money for a particular object, and leave it behind them for the promotion of that object, their successors have no right to change the object endowed,” for “there is nothing in calling an associated body a Church that exempts it from the legal obligations of insisting that money given for one purpose shall not be devoted to another.”
    Lord Alverstone CJ was unable “to support a judgment which would deprive the persons, forming a minority, of their rights, simply on the ground that they are unwilling to become members of a body which has not only abandoned the fundamental principles of the Church to which they belong, but supports a principle essentially different from that on which the Church was founded.”
    Lord Robinson did not believe that “in giving to the Free Church, the pious founders of the Free Church were knowingly giving to a Church, one of whose inherent qualities was that she could alter her essential principles. Neither history nor law makes this out.”
    The Lord Chancellor quoted a memorable phrase of Sir William Smith in the Irish Case of Dill v Watson (1836) 2 Jo Ex Ir 48.) that a body free to change its beliefs would be “a church without a religion.”
    After all, every law student will have read in the Institutes “A theft takes place not only when anyone removes the property of another for the sake of appropriating it, but, generally speaking, when anyone handles another’s property against the consent of the owner. Therefore, whether a creditor makes use of a pledge, or a depositary of property left with him, or whether he who received an article to be used, employs it for some other purposes than that for which it was given, he commits a theft; for instance, if anyone has received silver to be used where friends are invited to supper, and takes it away with him out of town; or where anyone to whom a horse has been lent for the purpose of taking a ride, removes it to a greater distance; and the example which the ancients mentioned in this case was that of one who took the horse into battle.” (IV 1 6)

  • Pinky:

    To your question, “So at the risk of slamming someone I agree with, are you sure that this was the best possible headline for this article?,” I don’t know. There were other headlines that I could have used, but I did think this one particular headline captured the idea of the post best. After all, the Erskine candidate wasn’t Presbyterian enough (in fact, a Baptist who may have been more aligned with the ARP’s values than those of the majority of U.S. Presbyterian denominations). Moreover, conservative applicants for administrative positions at most U.S. Catholic institituions are viewed with suspicion as “too Catholic.” So, in the end, the explanation given for the conservative candidate’s non-hiring is that “The candidate was simply too Catholic..,” the subtext being that person would wreak havoc on the institution by insisting upon doctrinal and liturgical fidelity. Couldn’t have that, now, could we?

    TMM

  • The same discrimination of being “too Catholic” has been in practice at Catholic high schools and grammar schools. I’m not talking about conservative ideologues, but simply being faithful to the Magisterium (and forsake you if you mention it) is a red flag. Much of our lower level teachers are marginal or non-practicing Catholics and former public school employees getting an extra post retirement income. From my experience most have a job in mind, not Catholic education. So disagreeing with Catholic teaching, in practice if not word, is not a problem for them or their administrators.

  • Ridiculing the Pope and the Sacraments, especially the Sacrament of Penance, is par for the course for anti Catholicism in some Catholic institutions. Two-thirds of the student body and one half of the faculty walked out when Cardinal Arinze spoke against homosexual behavior. Sodomy 101

  • Mary De Voe — what college was that? Notre Dame?

  • Michael P-S true : Sir William Smith in the Irish Case of Dill v Watson (1836) 2 Jo Ex Ir 48.) that a body free to change its beliefs would be “a church without a religion.”
    People are giving up so much and not realizing it, perhaps as a group we are just out of the habit or ability to think very deeply.

  • FBTL, I think Mary De Voe might have been referring to the time Cardinal Arinze
    spoke to the Georgetown graduating class of 2003. His Eminence said, in part:
    .
    “In many parts of the world, the family is under siege. It is opposed by an
    anti-life mentality as is seen in contraception, abortion, infanticide and
    euthanasia. it is scorned and banalized by pornography, desecrated by
    fornication and adultery, mocked by homosexuality, sabotaged by irregular
    unions and cut in two by divorce”.
    .
    One member of the faculty was so outraged by this part of the Cardinal’s speech
    that she walked off the stage. Within days, the Dean received a letter of protest
    signed by 70+ Georgetown faculty. Newspaper reports state that a large
    number of students chose to walk out during the Cardinal’s address.
    .
    One interesting thing I read about the fallout surrounding Cardinal Arinze’s
    speech was the response of one Ed Ingebretsen, a Georgetown professor of
    English. He posted an apology on the Georgetown email subscription list “on
    behalf of Catholics” for the Cardinal’s “insensitive remarks”, calling them “un-
    Christian”. So i spent a couple of minutes on Google to find out about the
    professor– who, it turns out, was ordained a Catholic priest in 1982, but
    since 2000 he’s been an official with something called the “American Catholic
    Church”. Oh, and there are yelp reviews for all the times he’s officiated at
    gay “weddings”.
    .
    So, while Cardinal Arinze is evidently too Catholic for most of Georgetown,
    Professor Ingebretsen appears to be just ‘Catholic’ enough… *sigh*

  • FBTL: “Mary De Voe — what college was that? Notre Dame?”
    .
    Sorry, FBTL. That was Georgetown, the same college that covered Christ’s initials at the request of Obama; embracing secularism.

  • Clinton: Excellent. Thanks for the review.

  • Michael Paterson-Seymour:

    ““when men subscribe money for a particular object, and leave it behind them for the promotion of that object, their successors have no right to change the object endowed,” “
    .
    Currently, The ACLU and The Freedom From Religion Foundation are trying to remove the cross atop a veterans cemetery on Mt. Soledad. Given their piece of property as a grave, the fallen soldiers have earned their piece of property by laying down their lives for freedom. They are martyrs for freedom. And “their successors have no right to change the object endowed.”
    .
    “After all, every law student will have read in the Institutes “A theft takes place not only when anyone removes the property of another for the sake of appropriating it, but, generally speaking, when anyone handles another’s property against the consent of the owner.”
    .
    These men gave their lives for that cross. The cross is theirs. If the atheist chooses to believe that he ceases to exist after death that is his choice, not ours.

    “Therefore, whether a creditor makes use of a pledge, or a depositary of property left with him, or whether he who received an article to be used, employs it for some other purposes than that for which it was given, he commits a theft; for instance, if anyone has received silver to be used where friends are invited to supper, and takes it away with him out of town; or where anyone to whom a horse has been lent for the purpose of taking a ride, removes it to a greater distance; and the example which the ancients mentioned in this case was that of one who took the horse into battle.”
    .
    The atheist exists, and therefore the atheist must be tolerated. Atheism is unconstitutional. The cross belongs to the soldiers and the soldiers’ memory.

  • The new world order, which is consistent with atheistic materialism, not Christianity, serves to deny the personhood of the son or daughter residing in their mother’s womb, while reordering man as an object of sexual desire/orientation, in direct violation of God’s Commandment regarding lust and the sin of adultery.

  • This does not change the fact that we should work together in regards to our due diligence. It is often difficult to judge whether a particular person supports our Catholic Faith and Mission, and when they do not, we have an obligation to explain, clearly and concisely, how a particular teaching of Christ’s Church is a reflection of authentic Trinitarian Love.

  • How about a principal telling a teacher that he was “too conservative” a Catholic because he believed and conveyed to his students the Church’s Magisterium? The principal, who received a theology degree from a Jesuit school, knew little of the Faith and suppressed and belittled Catholic efforts in the classroom (have you ever heard anyone say that a classroom looked “too Catholic” or a principal having an abysmal lack of knowledge Catholic prayers or halting the school-wide praying of the Angelus, etc, etc?). The diocesan education office, who installed this principal without an open call for applicants, of course ignored the problem, which predictably resulted in the school closing a short time later.
    At another place, most of the staff were not Catholic who, in fact during an in-service with other schools, belittled our Faith and greatly embarrassed the school. Complaints to the hierarchy of the school fell upon deaf ears.
    Too Catholic? It seems just being a practicing Catholic is too much and unwelcome in our schools.

Predatory sexual abuse of minors: “What’s…it…matter…now?”

Thursday, June 5, AD 2014

 

The article’s lead paragraph says it all:

The recent arrests of teachers in the El Paso area accused of sex crimes against students is part of a nationwide epidemic that dwarfs the priest molestation scandal.

Now, if true, that’s a very big story. But, it seems it’s one in which the mainstream media (MSM) doesn’t appear very much interested. Instead, the MSM—including the National Catholic Reporter—has been focused like a laser whenever the story involves a priest, even if the case is decades old and a $3M settlement was reached.

Now, that’s not to dismiss any of those stories about predatory priests. What’s wrong is wrong—no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Prosecute the evildoers to the full extent of the law. It is to say that the MSM seems to be motivated by a particular agenda concerning those stories: To expose the moral failures of Catholic priests, not those of public school teachers and staff.

Terri Miller, the president of a victims advocacy group that tracks teacher-staff sexual misconduct across the nation—Stop Educator Sexual Abuse Misconduct and Exploitation (S.E.S.A.M.E)—is quoted in the El Paso Times as saying that since January 1, 2014, 180+ teachers in the United States have been arrested for alleged sexual misconduct. As of June 1,2014, that’s 1+ teachers-staff/day. Miller said: “We find that to be a huge problem of epidemic proportions.”

Think that number high?

A 10-year-old U.S. Department of Education study indicated that ~10% of children in U.S. public schools are victims of teacher-staff sexual misconduct sometime during their elementary and high school years. The alleged misconduct ranged from sexual comments to statutory rape. However, even though the U.S. Department of Education tracks just about everything that transpires in the nation’s public schools and will be tracking even more with the common core, the Department doesn’t track teacher-staff sexual misconduct! Furthermore, school districts are extremely reluctant to publicize problems. So, with no data available, a compliant MSM has no story. But, when it was discovered that dioceses weren’t tracking misconduct on the part of priests as well as only reluctantly publicizing any allegation, didn’t a non-compliant MSM function as the primary whistleblower?

Well, that was in 2004. To quote Hilary Clinton’s testimony before Congress about Benghazi: “What’s…it…matter…now?”

Well, 10 years later, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report examining the sexual abuse of K-12 students in the nation’s public schools. In January 2014, the GAO found that policies and methods to prevent teacher-staff misconduct vary from state to state and from school district to school district. The report noted:

The sexual abuse of students and sexual misconduct by public K-12 school personnel is a complex problem, and such behavior is particularly egregious because schools are entrusted with educating the nation’s children. There are no simple solutions to this problem and, although states and school districts are taking some positive steps, current efforts are clearly not enough.

This is now. Ever hear of that report? Did the MSM publicize its content 24/7/365?

Worse yet, the teachers and staff who are accused of misconduct typically are “placed on leave” and, then, “resign.” But that’s not all. According to Miller:

When I was in high school more than 35 years ago, there were teachers sleeping around. The creepy guys. They would be gone one day to the next. They just seemed to disappear.

But those “creepy guys” didn’t disappear. No, an accused teacher would be sent to different school or allowed to resign and move to another district. The practice was called “passing the trash.” What this practice allowed is for teachers accused of misconduct potentially to victimize multiple students before being brought to justice. Miller notes that teachers charged with sexual misconduct typically work in 3 jurisdictions before being punished. She said: “This practice of ‘passing the trash’ is truly evil. It is helping and abetting child molesters.”

Okay. But, all of that was also a very long time ago. Again, “What’s…it…matter?” Besides, victims’ advocates—including S.E.S.A.M.E’S Miller—believe “passing the trash” has decreased. No…big…problem.

Doesn’t that sound eerily similar to bishops who moved predatory priests around their dioceses and across dioceses?  Didn’t the MSM widely publicize bishops who engaged in similar, reprehensible conduct? Why weren’t public school superintendents exposed?

If Miller’s statistics concerning teacher-staff sexual misconduct in the nation’s public schools are accurate, her assessment may be correct:

The abuse that is happening in our schools is 10 times worse than the abuse that happened with clergy in five decades.

“The problem of educator abuse is far greater than clergy abuse,” Miller concluded. “The big difference is that we are not mandated to send our children to church. We are mandated to send them to school.”

Well, it may very well be accurate that teacher-staff sexual misconduct in the nation’s public schools is an “epidemic” affecting nearly ~4.5M students and “10 times worse than the abuse that happened with clergy” during the past 5 decades. But, given a generally compliant MSM, it sure would be difficult for anyone to discover.

Why? Could it that the predatory priests didn’t have  unions and a generally compliant MSM to protect them?

 

 

 

To read the Daily Mail’s recent article concerning a decades’ old sexual abuse story, click on the following link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2646248/Catholic-diocese-claims-priest-duty-molested-boy-attempt-deflect-responsibility-sex-crimes.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

To read the El Paso Times article, click on the following link:
http://m.elpasotimes.com/elpasotimes/db_22762/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=zc481fKm&full=true#display

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

19 Responses to Predatory sexual abuse of minors: “What’s…it…matter…now?”

  • The number of reporters and editors who have 1st and 2d degree relations employed as school teachers, administrators, or labor meatheads indubitably well exceeds the number who have clergymen that proximate to them. And, of course they’re biased toward people in salaried employments which require low-rent B.A. degrees, involve a great deal of verbilization, do not have good operational measures of competence, and do not challenge the official idea in this country. The teachers are them.

  • The rule “testis unus, testis nullus” [one witness is no witness] makes such cases very difficult to prosecute.
    Successful prosecutions almost always rely on the Moorov doctrine, namely, that where an accused person is charged with a series of similar offences closely linked in time, character and circumstances, the evidence of one witness implicating the accused in one offence may be taken to corroborate the evidence of another witness implicating the accused in another offence, each offence being treated as if it were an element in a single course of conduct. The rule must be applied with caution and where there are only two similar offences, even more caution must be exercised in applying the rule. The downside is that, if the jury do not accept one of two complainers as credible and reliable, they must find both charges (or sets of charges) not proven.
    Even in a country like Scotland, where the Crown Office acts as a central clearing house for prosecutions, many offenders, I am sure, slip through the net; where the accused can easily move from one jurisdiction to another, successful prosecutions must be all but impossible. On a lighter note, I recall one report of a case of theft that bore the unfortunate headnote, “Possession in Scotland evidence of theft in England.”

  • “The rule ‘testis unus, testis nullus’ [one witness is no witness] makes such cases very difficult to prosecute.” Not on this side of the pond if it’s a Catolic priest . . .

    But, I’m shocked and bewildered. Not b/c some teachers are beneath evil. I’m dismayed/shocked that this news made the news: it does not support the vile narrative as do their innumerable attacks (distortions, exaggerations, fabrications, omissions, ad infinitum repetitions) on Holy Mother Church support their sordid agenda.

    FYI: For some, unimaginable reason last night FOXNY aired the arrest of a female NYC high school gym teacher for “raping” two young men.

  • It is very simple. The public schools are considered progressive, enlightened institutions, while the Church is considered a regressive, backwards institution. Any club to beat the Church will do, but don’t expect it to be wielded against those who are on “the right side of history.”

  • There is no statute of limitations for clerical abuse. In New York State the statute of limitations is 90 days. The child, the minor child has not figured out what has happened to him in 90 days. Our Father who art in heaven, deliver us from evil.

  • Pingback: Predatory sexual abuse of minors: “What’s…it…matter…now?” | Catholic Canada
  • Mary de Voe

    There should be no statute of limitations for any crime.

    The old maxim was “nullum tempus occurit regi” [Time does not run against the king (or his Advocate)]

    In 2000, Marie Docherty (Sister Alphonso) was convicted of four charges of cruel and unnatural treatment towards children at Nazareth House homes in Aberdeen and Lasswade, Midlothian between 1965 and 1980. Three further charges were found not proven.

    Of course, subsequent civil claims were very properly dismissed, on the grounds of mora, taciturnity and acquiescence. Individuals can waive their rights; the public cannot.

    Of course, once arrested or charged, strict time-limits should apply, but that is a very different matter.

  • Michael Paterson-Seymour: “There should be no statute of limitations for any crime.”
    .
    I wholeheartedly agree.The victim is the victim for all time.

  • Worse yet, the teachers and staff who are accused of misconduct typically are “placed on leave” and, then, “resign.”

    Part of why we’re planning to home school is a case where the criminal was placed on leave, found guilty, served his time, and only resigned when parents surrounded the school for three days straight and he couldn’t return to work.
    ****************
    There should be no statute of limitations for any crime.

    I can’t agree. After a point, there is no reasonable way to prove anything; if I was accused of not paying a mail box rental bill from my first command over a decade ago, all they would have to do is destroy the paper for it ending. I don’t have my copy anymore! And no, it’s not reasonable to expect people to keep every account closure paper they have ever had in their entire adult life, at the price of being found guilty of not paying bills.
    And that’s just a simply proven crime of theft-by-not-paying; things like stealing a dune buggy that you bought 30 years ago, for cash? Or assault with four witnesses of your own, for an event a decade back– there’s no way to defend against that, and people are not that perfect, even ignoring the possibility of deliberate lying.

  • There should be no statute of limitations for any crime.

    Insane.

  • Art Deco: A statute of limitations gives aid and comfort to the enemy. He needs to repent.

  • Mary-
    A lack of one gives aid and comfort to the enemy; it enables people to lie and gain by it, and removing the ability to defend from the innocent.

  • Foxfier

    The difficulties over loss of evidence is far more likely to affect the prosecution. It is for them, after all, to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and on corroborated evidence.

    To take your examples

    1) The rental – Non-payment cannot amount to theft.
    2) The buggy – Possession of recently stolen goods only requires an explanation from the accused, if there are other criminating circumstances. If an explanation is offered, it is not for the accused to prove it is true, but for the Crown to prove it is false.
    3) The assault – There would have to be independent evidence implicating the accused and the jury would have to be satisfied both witnesses were both credible and reliable. Of the 27 charges Sr Alphonso faced, she was convicted of only four.

    “it enables people to lie and gain by it”
    No, it does not. Any civil claim for damages would be barred by mora and taciturnity. It is only the public prosecutor who is not barred.

  • The difficulties over loss of evidence is far more likely to affect the prosecution. It is for them, after all, to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and on corroborated evidence.

    That’s the theory.
    In practice, they offer their evidence and in the case of rape the accusation itself is rather large evidence– example, various “30 years ago I was molested by a dead priest” cases.
    Rape itself is incredibly short-lived if you are going to get actual evidence of a crime. Murder, you’ve got a corpse, but this….
    ****
    1) The rental – Non-payment cannot amount to theft.
    That would be such a comfort when I was hit with a bill for thousands of dollars that I have no way to defend against– it’s morally theft, but is a different legal classification.
    2) it was specifically not recent.
    3) Like witnesses. Not hard to get a photograph with a bruise that is inside of four years of the claimed assault, or that looks like it.
    ***
    Yes, a lack of statue of limitations does allow people to lie and profit. There’s a reason they aren’t universal, but just like someone being legally declared dead– otherwise the innocent will be looking over their shoulders in case someone wants to harm them.
    There’s a reason that most statue of limitations that I’ve looked at have carve-outs for new evidence, being prevented from reporting, investigations being dropped, etc.

  • Things I’ve seen first hand:
    a car that was totaled and sold to a junk lot is “found abandoned” and a bill sent to the person who sold it over five years ago– even though they’d properly filed the paperwork that it had been sold. Luckily, they kept the paper, even though it had been longer than you’re supposed to.
    A ticket is sent to a business on the far side of the state that a car they have for parts was going over 30 above the speed limit; the only reason they didn’t pay that is one of the owners as a rich lawyer for a son.
    A military member canceled his internet subscription and deployed. Three months later the company says he signed up for a phone connection– at which point he was in the middle of the Indian Ocean. They did not send a bill until after automatic forwarding expired. Several years later, he gets handed a bill; obviously, even if he had the paper about closing his internet account, he has no proof he closed the phone account because he never had a phone with them. “I was in the middle of the ocean” is not sufficient, and he can’t fly to the state to be in court.
    ***
    Extrapolate that on outwards, since all three were most likely chosen because they were expected to be a high reward for low risk of fight.

  • Michael, police departments and prosecutor’s offices need to husband their time; Cold Case units need to be reviewing unsolved homicides, of which there are plenty in a city of ordinary size. That aside, there actually are a selection of crimes and a selection of cases where the accused is expected to demonstrate his innocence.

    Here was a nice one here, where the prosecutor got a conviction on dodgy eyewitness testimony and an argument that there was a slim possibility that the accused could have flown between Orlando and New York and back to commit the crime:

    http://www.propublica.org/article/for-a-respected-prosecutor-an-unpardonable-failure?utm_campaign=sprout&utm_content=1401902912&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_term=with-image

    This unfortunate husband (provably at a motel in southwest Virginia at the time his wife was murdered in Raleigh, NC) has another shot due to procedural errors:

    http://www.wral.com/nc-appeals-court-orders-new-murder-trial-for-jason-young/13528780/

    Then there was the 2d grade teacher in my home town facing charges of molestation – lodged seven years after the fact. How is he supposed to defend himself against such a charge? Read the comment boxes under stories of that character. There are lots of people who would vote to convict the proverbial ham sandwich if a prosecutor said the sandwich fondled a schoolgirl.

  • MPS references “mora and taciturnity.”
    .
    How does this differ from the equitable defense of laches?

  • Slainté asks how “mora and taciturnity” differs from the equitable defence of laches.

    I dare say it is the Civilian equivalent. Like homologation and rei interventus, It is a form of personal bar (what Common Lawyers call estoppels)

    Mora or delay, however, can create liability. If I borrow a horse, I am normally only liable for culpa, but, if I am in mora, by failing to return it on time, I am liable at all hazards, even if t drops dead of an aneurism – a harsh rule, showing the Roman preference for simplicity and certainty.

    Foxfier wrote

    “That would be such a comfort when I was hit with a bill for thousands of dollars” In other words, a civil claim; no one is suggesting a civil claim should not prescribe.

    “it was specifically not recent” Precisely and so no explanation is required of the accused. To secure a conviction, the prosecutor would have to produce witnesses to the taking by the accused. (Even CCTV evidence is only one source and the law of corroboration requires two independent sources. That is why one cannot convict on fingerprint evidence alone in Scotland – although one can in England, where corroboration is not required)

    “Not hard to get a photograph with a bruise” A bruise on the complainer corroborates her testimony that she was hit. What is required is corroborated evidence implicating the accused. His grazed knuckles, of course, would be such evidence, or her blood on his clothing.

    “Rape itself is incredibly short-lived if you are going to get actual evidence of a crime” Which is why 80% of panels are acquitted. However, some 10-year old cases have been successfully prosecuted, using DNA evidence collected at the time (together with other evidence, of course)

  • Pingback: Lift Ban on Eastern Catholic Married Priests - BigPulpit.com

Pope Francis: A “political genius”?

Tuesday, May 27, AD 2014

 

The subtitle of the January 17, 2014, Politico article concerning Pope Francis was eye-catching: “This guy could teach President Obama a thing or two.”

The article’s author, Candida Moss—a professor of New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame—wasn’t writing about biblical, moral, or ethical matters. No, she was writing about political matters and reversing President Obama’s low poll numbers.

HH

Moss’ thesis is that because President Obama and Pope Francis have so much in common, perhaps “that guy”—the President—can learn “a thing or two” (it’s actually four things) from “this guy”—the Pope.

Regarding those similarities:

  • Both elections were historic firsts: Obama was the first Black elected U.S. President and Francis is the first Pope from Latin America and first Jesuit.
  • Both preside over deeply-divided constituencies and institutions: Scandal and bureaucratic incompetence plague both the U.S. government and Roman Curia.
  • Charting an unlikely path to power, both were initially media darlings who were heralded as ushering in a hopeful new era. President Obama has slipped in the polls but Pope Francis remains astoundingly high in the polls.

Given these similarities, Moss wonders why Pope Francis’ approval rating is 200%+ more than President Obama’s?

Moss answers her question, offering four lessons Pope Francis might have to teach President Obama:

  1. While utterly without guile, Pope Francis avoids the trappings of office which bolsters his credibility on political issues. The lesson?  President Obama should avoid the trappings of the imperial presidency. After all, Moss notes, “power unexercised is power preserved.”
  2. Pope Francis sets aside notes and speaks off the cuff, giving his words an additional layer of sincerity. The lesson? President Obama should get out from behind the teleprompter and toss the script aside.
  3. Pope Francis has a knack for politics as well as people. His “eagerness to engage people proves not just that he’s a man of the people, but that he’s willing to do this despite the risk to his personal safety.” The lesson? President Obama should emulate the humility and accessibility of Pope Francis.
  4. Pope Francis embodies a few big ideas and persuades people to rally around them. The lesson? “What American president couldn’t benefit from a reminder of that?

Moss summarizes these four lessons stating “Herein lies the genius of Pope Francis’s papacy: He has persuaded the world he isn’t a politician and, in doing so, has become arguably the most politically influential man in the world.”

If Moss’ assessment is accurate, Pope Francis has mastered the politician’s arts. Were President Obama to become more like Pope Francis, his polling numbers would skyrocket.

There’s a problem The Motley Monk has with Professor Moss’ assessment.

Pope Francis would have to become the politician he is not. And President Obama would have to become the spiritual leader he is not. After all, leopards don’t change their spots.

 

 

To read Candida Moss’ article in Politico, click on the following link:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/01/pope-francis-political-genius-102301.html#.U4OHxPldXE0

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

24 Responses to Pope Francis: A “political genius”?

  • Thank you Motley! The musings of Ms. Moss gets my work week off to a laugh. I believe she understands Obama and the Pope as well as she does Christian persecution by the Romans:

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2013/03/12/the-myth-of-candida-moss/

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2013/03/14/bad-history-was-the-persecution-of-christians-a-myth/

  • I thought the name “Candida Moss” looked familiar. Candida Moss denies the early Christian martyrs and all of their bodies in the catacombs. Candida Moss believes that the early Christian martyrs were not free to choose to be Catholic, and therefore, these martyrs deserved to be put to death for disobeying the Emperor. Now, she, along with Obama is denying the human soul and the soul’s conscience. How is it that Candida Moss is still teaching at NOTRE DAME? (No more money from me).
    .
    “Moss goes on to argue that the Romans weren’t really persecuting Christians, they were prosecuting them for what they saw as violations of Roman cultural and legal norms.” – See more at: http://the-american-catholic.com/2013/03/14/bad-history-was-the-persecution-of-christians-a-myth/#sthash.AlRqD3K3.dpuf
    .
    You will abort, euthanize, contracept and engage in fornication to pay homage to the devil. You will pay taxes to support human sacrifice, contraception and fornication. Which leads us to the question: Did the Romans execute Christians as human sacrifice to their gods and emperors? If the early Christians were put to death for not offering incense to Roman gods or the emperor as a Roman god, it is indeed a “persecution, a religious persecution”, not as Candida Moss maintains a “prosecution” for violating Roman laws.”
    .
    Candida Moss holds a teaching post of theology at Notre Dame, and she does not recognize or acknowledge the meaning of “religion”, or the First Constitutional Amendment. “abandon hope all you who enter here”

  • None of this has any reference at all to the Good. Just manipulation and PR. Very sad statement that polity is rapidly losing any retaliation ship to Good. So does not seek Goodness in civil leaders, only seeking Comfort- which is a lot easier for both religious leaders and polical leaders to sell.
    .
    It seems that what is trending is the promotion of a type of prosperity gospel that everything is all right and everybody can have everything- no personal involvement, effort, investment or change necessary. Just relax and let it go- that’s what will make everyone Happy.

  • Sorry I didn’t mean retaliation ship! Relationship .

  • What does Ms. Moss call the planet on which she exists?

    Politics are essentially coersion and deceit (Orwell).

    Anyhow, Obama doesn’t need a majority of the people saying he is doing a satisfactory job. He has 99% of the wilfully uncurious press corps covering for him.

    As such the “shelf life” of the regime is extended. Zero Hedge: “What is the shelf life of a system that rewards confidence-gaming sociopaths rather than competence? Those in power exhibit hubris, arrogance, bullying, deception and substitute rule by elites for the rule of law. The status quo rewards misrepresentation, obfuscation, legalized looting, embezzlement, fraud, a variety of cons, gaming the system, deviousness, lying and cleverly designed deceptions.

    “Our leadership was selected not for competence but for deviousness. What’s incentivized in our system is spinning half-truths and propaganda with a straight face and running cons that entrench the pathology of power.”

    Here is evidence: Congressional approval rating – 11%. Congressional incumbents winning primary elections: 100%. Need I say more?

  • Pingback: Pope Francis Presser on Divorced & Remarried - BigPulpit.com
  • Ah yes. Because the most important thing about either a Pope or a President is that he have high poll numbers. Ideally, he should have a cult of personality built up around him.

  • Moss’s politics are as shallow as her scholarship.

  • The critiques are well placed but I think there is something useful in the piece: her observations about approachability are worth consideration for regular folks.

    Those persons who remain grounded and accessible as they move up in their careers are more persuasive. I’ve worked for the puffed up who think they have their hands on the reins but have far less control than they pretend or imagine. I’ve also worked for the “common man,” respectable but understated, persusasive and respectful. Most managers are somewhere in between.

    Humility is an odd thing, it cannot be faked for long and the faker is despised all the more for the pretending. If real, it is charming and draws people to the man. It is like a self-effacing joke that reveals more in a moment than mountains of words.

    Perhaps that is the “genius,” to use Ms. Moss’ concept, of Jefferson, Lincoln, and Reagan.

    There is, though, a natural instinct to sense and follow greatness that trumps this “genius” though. Hamilton has always struck me as a bit of a jerk. John Marshall has too. However, their intellects dwarfed other men of their age. As much as I detest FDR, the sheer audacity of his program and over-aweing will made a follower of men who should have led the opposition.

    So, while Ms. Moss may have her argument half thought out and badly presented, the observation strikes me as one worth considering. Some are lights themselves and other inadvertently provide the spark.

  • The very soul of the Jesuit order was forged in the furnace of the counter reformation,they were men dedicated to bringing the elite back into the fold.We shouldn’t be surprised that the Pope is good at what Jesuits do.

  • “the Pope is good at what Jesuits do.”

    Lately the Jesuits seem to me to be missionaries within the Church of the opinions of the self-anointed elite of the West, rather than the other way around.

  • Pascal summed up the Jesuit policy very neatly; it has not changed in 350 years – “”That is what you have yet to learn,” he replied. “Know then that their object is not the corruption of manners- that is not their design. But as little is it their sole aim to reform them- that would be bad policy. Their idea is briefly this: They have such a good opinion of themselves as to believe that it is useful, and in some sort essentially necessary to the good of religion, that their influence should extend everywhere, and that they should govern all consciences. And the Evangelical or severe maxims being best fitted for managing some sorts of people, they avail themselves of these when they find them favourable to their purpose. But as these maxims do not suit the views of the great bulk of the people, they waive them in the case of such persons, in order to keep on good terms with all the world…”

  • I’m not sure quoting a Jansenist to make a point about Jesuits is quite fair. Pascal was a complicated man and the period of his most ardent following of Jansenism was a troubled time in his life. Catholic? Yes. But it was Jansenism that was subject to heresy findings so I’m not sure their distaste of the Jesuits is a terribly strong indictment of the order.

  • Interestingly, the four things she believes BO should do are four thigs that he is incapable of doing, both personally and politically.
    .
    To believe he could is the height of delusion . . . gee, no surprises there.

  • Not fair to hear the assessment of Pascal in his observation of Jesuits?
    Peter Kreeft: Those who dismiss Pascal with the label of “Jansenist” are like those who call all orthodox Christians “fundamentalists”: the label reveals more about the labeler than about the labeled. …
    .

  • About the lack of reference to the Good, just to what works. We have not yet rejected the sophistry of the one who was really really good at this- Bill Clinton.

  • I am for sending Ms. Moss to the Capitol of Iran for a forced solo stay for 5 years in a land where even nominal Christians risk the death penalty on a daily basis. Her being a female would also add depth and understanding to her experiment in experience gaining insite into the term “prosecution” vs “persecution.”

  • Anzlyne, I thought my response quite measured. Pascal is an important figure and, as I said before, quite complicated – as all great minds are. I objected to applying a single Pascal quote to the entire history of the Order, not because Pascal was a Jansenist (there is considerable debate as to whether he remained so and how committed to Jansenism he was) but because I’m not sure a single quote is quite sufficient to answer the Order’s contribution to our faith.

  • Wouldn’t this quote be more appropriately read as a characterization of modus operandi than as a history or statement of contribution?

    “…Their idea is briefly this: They have such a good opinion of themselves as to believe that it is useful, and in some sort essentially necessary to the good of religion, that their influence should extend everywhere, and that they should govern all consciences. And the Evangelical or severe maxims being best fitted for managing some sorts of people, they avail themselves of these when they find them favourable to their purpose. But as these maxims do not suit the views of the great bulk of the people, they waive them in the case of such persons, in order to keep on good terms with all the world…”

  • If I understand, I agree with you about any broad brush against or for these great minds – Pacal’s also the Jesuit’s You prob know a lot more about them than I do!

  • Sorry for the delay in responding. Work and then family life consumed me.

    I had/have mixed feelings about His Holiness’ Jesuit roots. He seems always “catching up” with the perception of his remarks. By this I mean, he seems to assume much common ground and intellectual capacity that is not there and then to be surprised that people take his words and actions at face value.

    This has been a common experience in my encounters with Jesuits.

    I worked nearly a week with two Jesuits on Project Appalachia back in the 90s before finding out they were priests. They weren’t hiding it, they just didn’t think it relevent to what we were doing (rebuilding a house and shed.) Without that context, the fascinating conversation about faith was merely a theological discussion between two graduate students with me as an onlooker. They actively engaged me in conversation too and I was constantly lost because I lacked the context, the background to be fully engaged.

    The church I go to in DC when I’m staying in NW is run by the Jesuits and I’ve had confession twice there. Both confessions were illuminating and as much spiritual guidance as Reconciliation. I’m 44. I’m quite sure I could not have benefited from that style of confession when I was 24. Would that confessor have met me where i was? I don’t know.

    Sometimes I wonder if His Holiness’ pastoral refrain, directing the clergy to meet the people where they are isn’t as much a reminder to himself and his fellow Jesuits as nything else.

    So, I think Pascal’s quote hints at this underlying Jesuit trait, that confidence in their individual and collective intellects that causes the wisest to hold back much and walk the people in baby steps towards their line of thinking. Now that I think of it, maybe that explains why there are so many very public heretics in the Order. It may also explain why they are able to be such champions of the Faith.

    That dicotemy, the militant and spartan instinct, coupled with the considered and challenged intellect, are, for me, the defining features of the Order and the Jesuits intrigue me because of it.

  • David Spaulding

    “{W]alk the people in baby steps…”

    One recalls the controversy over the Chinese and Malabar rites; an early attempt at enculturation.

  • It is worth looking at again with this line of thinking in the background, MPS.

  • This piece makes me question my previous answer. It does not appear that at least this Jesuit writer thinks Jesuits and His Holiness struggle to meet people where they are because of their intellectualism: http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/jesuit-reflects-jesuit-popes-interview-jesuits

Au revoir and good riddance, Secretary Sebelius…

Wednesday, May 21, AD 2014

 

Over at The Catholic Thing, Dr. Paul Kengor—a professor of political science at Grove City College—comments about the transition now taking place at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The outgoing Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, confronts the specter of the threat of contempt of Congress. According to Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), Sebelius has obstructed the House Oversight Committee’s investigation into the rollout of Obamacare:

The Department’s substantial delay in production, combined with its improper redactions, has obstructed the Committee’s investigation. Should the Department continue to refuse to produce all documents in un-redacted form as required by the instructions in the subpoena issued on October 30, 2013, I will have no alternative but to consider the full range of options to enforce the subpoena.

Sebelius

That’s provides great fodder for political junkies.

But, more important in the estimation of The Motley Monk, is Kengor’s discussion about what the HHS transition has to do with the Roman Catholic Church. As Kengor notes:

Kathleen Sebelius will be remembered not only as Barack Obama’s longtime HSS Secretary, but also as the spearhead of Obamacare. For that, many liberals will remember her fondly.

And here’s why:

  • Sebelius is a lifetime/pro-choice Catholic who, as the Governor of Kansas, expanded access to abortion in the state.
  • As HHS Secretary, Sebelius then expanded access to abortion nationally, forcing religious believers of practically every stripe to fund contraception and abortion drugs.
  • According to the New York Times and Politico, Sebelius and Valerie Jarrett–President Obama’s closest adviser–championed the mandate from the outset. They did so even as Vice President Joe Biden and Obama Chief of Staff Bill Daley (both Catholics) warned the President to consider carefully the backlash from the Catholic Church. Sebelius and Jarret bested Biden and Daley. (NOTE: One thing Dr. Kengor didn’t mention: The assistance and cover provided by the Catholic Health Association of the United States in the person of Sr. Carol Keehan.)

Keehan3

Sebelius’ legacy includes one of the most anti-Catholic pieces of policy legislation and religious discrimination in U.S. history. “That is quite a legacy for a Catholic public official,” Kengor notes.

With Sebelius on the way out, the selection of Sylvia Burwell as HHS Secretary offers Roman Catholics a bit of solace. Nothing’s going to change, of course. But, according to Kengor:

…whatever Burwell’s doings, I can say this much that gives me a measure of relief as a Catholic: At least she isn’t Catholic. At least we’ll no longer have a Catholic who is the point-person and poster girl for this ignoble and ignominious cause. I don’t know if that is much solace, but maybe it makes the ordeal slightly less painful.

As for the unborn children whose lives will be snuffed out at taxpayer expense, the pain continues. And for that ordeal, Kathleen Sebelius, lifetime Roman Catholic, will always shoulder her share of responsibility.

Kudos to Dr. Kengor for discussing these important matters in his is substantive post in defense of the Gospel of Life.

 

 

To read Dr. Paul Kengor’s post, click on the following link:
http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2014/so-long-kathleen.html

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

6 Responses to Au revoir and good riddance, Secretary Sebelius…

  • The HHS Mandate was added after Obamacare was voted on by Congress leaving the consent of the people, the informed consent of the people, violated. Contempt of Congress is the tip of the iceberg to the machinations and subterfuge of the liberals who refuse to read the First Amendment “…or prohibit the free exercise thereof.” by penalties, taxation without representation. Man is composed of a human body and an immortal human soul. Obama care cannot and cannot change that. To try to destroy the human being as Obamacare has is taxation without representation. Obama must represent his constituents body and soul. The soul is blest with conscience. That Sebelius and Obama have sold their conscience to the devil does not give them or anyone the right to sell our conscience to the devil. “Congress shall make no law concerning the establishment of religion…”
    .
    The atheist, Madalyn Murray O’Hair was told by the Supreme Court that: “she could go her own way.”. Let Obamacare PLEASE let us go our own way.

  • “Let Obamacare PLEASE let us go our own way.”

    God’s law trumps man’s law, Mary. I see in the news many loyal Catholics are telling Obumbler to “stick it”.
    I would not like to be in Sebellius’ shoes on judgement day.

  • Sibelius….Traitor and disemboweler of Christian conscience.

    Our June of 2012 rally for religious freedom welcomed seven great guest speakers including our local Bishop Hebda. These gatherings took place simultaneously in over 200 cities.

    Sibelius will see truth when she departs from this world. In her last moments she will be escorted to each rally, and listen to the words that were shared by patriots. Her role is traitor.

  • It is a war. She is a wounded and fallen soldier from the enemy camp, the losing side. We have confidence in the goodness of God, and in our victory in Him. As we live and breathe the maxim that He is Love, we pray for the conversion of sinners.

  • If President Obama is refusing to represent his constituents, body, blood, soul and conscience, then, he is breaking his oath of office to uphold the Constitution, to represent all people in equal Justice, to represent the human person, body, blood, soul and conscience. Neither Sebelius not Obama own the conscience of the person. Without the conscience, man is nothing but an animal to be owned by his keepers. If I insulted Sebelius by calling her “an old nag” or “a dog in heat”, then, I would be saying that Sebelius as “an old nag” or “a dog in heat” has no human soul and no human conscience.
    .
    This is exactly what Obama and Sebelius have done to every American citizen by removing the conscience protection from the HHS Mandate.
    .
    excerpt from Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptist Church about the wall of separation of church and state:
    “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”
    .
    “Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience…” Does anyone find “the rights of conscience” in the HHS Mandate?
    Man “has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.” Man owes the “necessities of life” to his neighbor as his social duties. The “necessities of life” would exclude abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, sex changes, unnatural sex, penile implants, breast augmentation, and the list of devil directed disgusting deceptions of the HHS Mandate and Obamacare goes on, eternal hell. and the taxpayers get to buy this through the imposition of taxes. Taxation without representation. Impeachment for violating the trust of the Constitution and malfeasance in office.
    .
    What Article in Constitutional law gives Obama the right to refuse to represent a human being’s conscience? Sebelius is not an honorable adversary. People must pray for her conscience because Sebelius sold her conscience to the devil…no, not Obama, the real Beelzebub.
    .
    George Washington would not have written the above.

  • Sebelius on Judgment Day may well be required to gaze on the babies that her regulations murdered. God will have to do no accusing. The Books will be opened and tge record of her very own mind will stand in condemnation of her heinous acts.

    Depart from me ye worker of iniquity; I never knew you.

Can it possibly be? A return to virtue at Boston College…

Monday, May 19, AD 2014

 

Consider the following statistics describing today’s undergraduates:

  • 60-80% of college students have had some sort of hookup experience.
  • 63% of college-age men and 83% of college-age women would prefer a traditional relationship to an uncommitted sexual one.

No doubt about it, college is the place to be if one is interested in engaging in sex.

Yet, an associate professor in psychology at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Richard McAnulty, notes: “The vast majority of young adults hope to be in a romantic relationship characterized by mutual love and commitment.”

If the latter statistics and McAnulty’s research are accurate, then would it not seem sensible for that every administrator at every one of the nation’s Catholic universities and colleges to work assiduously to provide undergraduates a culture wherein they can fulfill their hope?

Yes, it is sensible. But, try convincing those administrators of their moral obligation to reverse the hook up culture. “How?” they ask.  When told “Provide students a culture that not only raises their hopes but also assists them to translate those hopes into actual behavior,” they oftentimes opine something learned…about hopelessness…like Sisyphus.

Forget those administrators. They’re more interested in producing slick advertising campaigns and travelling all over Timbuktu to raise hundreds of millions of dollars for their institutions than they are about their primary moral obligations to form their students in wisdom and grace before God and man.

But, according to the Boston Globe, hope is alive…at Boston College.

There, the associate director of the Lonergan Institute, Kerry Cronin, is showing those feckless administrators how to build that culture. How? She’s teaching her students the lost art of dating…that is, how to date. The idea came to Cronin years back when she was delivering a lecture about the hookup culture. A student asked, “How would you ask someone on a date?…Like the actual words.”

Cronin believes most of today’s undergraduates don’t know how to date or, even, how to ask for a date. Why? This generation has grown up with relatively low expectations in the realm of “happily every after.” She notes:

  • In their world, most embrace group activities that are punctuated with the periodic hookup.
  • They communicate in digital bursts of 140-250 characters instead of in person.

Cronin’s pedagogical remedy? A class assignment that helps students reclaim the “lost social script” of dating. Not knowing where to begin or what to say, the assignment defines the boundaries so that students know exactly what to expect:

  • The date has to be 45 to 90 minutes in length with a person of legitimate romantic interest.
  • The student has to pay and has to make the invitation not by text or e-mail but in person.
  • The date cannot involve alcohol, kissing, or sex.

Cronin tells her students that dating requires the courage to be vulnerable to another person. As a freshman, Frank DiMartino said about the assignment:

It’s easy to hook up with someone you’ve just met in a dark room after having a few drinks. But asking someone out on a date in broad daylight, and when you actually have to know their name, can be really scary.

Cronin’s assignment directly confronts the culture that emphasizes uncommitted sex when it’s committed love that their hearts desire. She says:

  • Students use friendships and groups to satisfy social and emotional needs and see hookups as purely physical. As a result, students don’t have a relationship that allows them to address the confusions or expectations that can arise out of hookups.
  • Relying on groups prevents students from learning to interact one-on-one.  Getting to know another person through a group dynamic is very different from getting to know another person in an interpersonal dynamic.
  • Social media, especially texting, is another way one-on-one conversations are mediated. It provides access to a constructed “virtual self.” Students may feel connected but it builds habits of “ADD-quality connections” rather than face-to-face relationships.

Cronin’s alternative builds on her students’ hope yet challenges them to risk failure. She said:

When you ask somebody, you risk failing, and nobody likes to fail or be vulnerable to rejection….[Undergraduates] like to push themselves out of their comfort zone only if the energy and effort will equal success. But when asking someone out, nothing can ensure the person is going to say yes.

Cronin believes the hookup culture “creates a part of life that is unnecessarily chaotic and lonely.”

Yes, indeed. Leading undergraduates from the darkness of sin into the light of faith, hope, and love. Cronin might not think of her assignment in this way, but she’s evangelizing young people about the Gospel of Life!

Kudos to Kerry Cronin! She’s treading in and casting her net into the deep waters that most Catholic university and college administrators fear will engulf, sink, and drown them and their careers.

 

 

To read the Boston Globe article, click on the following link:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/2014/05/16/boston-college-professor-assigns-students-dates/jHXENWsdmp7cFlRPPwf0UJ/story.html

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

59 Responses to Can it possibly be? A return to virtue at Boston College…

  • “It’s easy to hook up with someone you’ve just met in a dark room after having a few drinks. But asking someone out on a date in broad daylight, and when you actually have to know their name, can be really scary.”

    I like the dark. I do not find it to be scary. I like looking at the stars at night. I like being in a chapel before the Blessed Sacrament with only a few candles lit. But I find the idea of a drunken hookup to be scary, dark or not. Lines like this are what convince me that Satan is real, because they show a total inversion of reality. Yes, it is scary to be rejected in public when asking someone on a date, but the rejection of all good things in an anonymous drunken hookup is truly far, far more frightening.

  • I blame these girls’ mothers.

    When I was at Oxford, the Heads of Houses were positively bombarded with requests by coteries of mothers, beating the covers for suitable (marriageable) young men, to attend the dances they had arranged in London for their daughters. These events were irreverently known as “mantraps.” Quite a few men were lured by the prospect of invitations to Epsom, Wimbledon, Ascot, Lords and Goodwood at someone else’s expense. No doubt, the investment often enough paid off, or parents would not have continued to make it.
    The same thing went on, on a smaller scale, in the provinces. The Scots, thriftier and more selective, favoured dinner-dances to introduce young people to a suitable partner. Country dancing is a great ice-breaker and the Gay Gordons gets everyone on the floor. To invite a girl to the Hunt Ball was considered virtually a declaration. And I am talking of the ‘Sixties.

  • beats the Locarno, Michael any day

  • Pingback: Middle East’s Christians Pope Francis Their Savior - Big Pulpit
  • Mike Hurcum

    The great advantage of country dancing is that, if one has, say, three couples, dancing in four-couple sets for eight repetitions, couples are always standing out, to watch and (hopefully) chat.

    Also, it does not require a great deal of space. I have seen it done in our entrance hall: 36 feet by 18.

  • Entrance Hall? Hey, whatever happened to your invitation to us all, over in the Crisis combox, to visit you this summer? “My Father’s house has many rooms…”

  • Motley, that is wonderful news. Link has been shared with my (teen) boys.

  • Tamsin325: Let’s not go too far, too fast. One professor’s noble efforts are noble, indeed. There are 761 FTE faculty at BC:
    http://www.bc.edu/about/bc-facts.html

  • I suspect that the near demise of dating is attributable to the omnipresent use of the computer (mobile and otherwise) which has transfixed the young (and not so young) into the isolation of virtual reality in lieu of personal interaction in actual reality.
    .
    Long phone chats are now texts; mall shopping for apparel and cosmetics is a routine and boring google search with a future postal delivery; and internet exchanges are the lukewarm substitutes for proms and socials.
    .
    The exhilaration of a personal introduction and the occasional rejection are laid bare of any real emotion by the impersonalism and anonymity of cyberspace communication.
    .
    Kudos to the brave Boston College prepsters for resurrecting the dying art of courting, the sweetness of a first personal introduction, the bumbling fumbles of a first kiss, and the heartbeak of a first break-up; all milestones necessary to personal growth. What’s old is new again!

  • The idea came to Cronin years back… A student asked, “How would you ask someone on a date?…Like the actual words.”

     
    Quite possibly Ms. Cronin had never herself asked anyone out on a date. Females typically expect men to do all the risking of social rejection and the paying of all the bills.
     

    I blame these girls’ mothers.
    –Michael Paterson-Seymour

     
    So do I.
     
    They should be asked if they reject Feminism and all its works.

  • I blame these girls’ mothers.

    No goals, no cultural script. System works great for certain character types: the one’s who exploit and injure others and are generally useless for building societies where well-being is to be expected. The mother’s have their own lives to justify, and these lives are commonly unedifying.

  • Micha Elyi writes, “…Females typically expect men to do all the risking of social rejection and the paying of all the bills…”
    .
    I have discussed this issue in some detail with women friends of various ages. The unalterable and timeless rules of dating from their collective perspective are “never ask a man on a date; he must ask”; “let the man lead”; and “a man should pay for dinners and other date activities”.
    .
    In their view (and few differed), breaking these rules would impair a man’s ego and/or diminish his sense of his own masculinity. If a man requested that a woman pay on a date, this would suggest that he would not be a good provider as a husband and would disqualify him for a second date.
    .
    My friends universally took exception when I acknowledged having offered to pay on a date. I had reasoned that a well compensated female executive should step up. This earned a universal thumbs down and was proclaimed as verboten in the courtship ritual. I don’t think the rules which were applicable back in the 90s have changed much today.
    .
    If you wish to ask a woman to reject Feminism…first define the word. Its meaning is just not that clear to many women.
    .
    Most of my friends would define a woman’s paying for dinner on a date as the act of a feminist.

  • I must be missing something big here. This whole thing strikes me as sappy.
    Mommies will you do this for your poor befuddled teens, they can’t figure out how to ask someone for a date or to grow a relationship. Talk about helicoptering!

    Teacher, it’s nice to give these kids a recipe or a pattern to follow, but better to teach them how to think. Thinking is what is being lost in this mass media techno-socialization age.
    People emote and feel, intellectual deduction and planning are right out.- perception, attention, learning, memory, concept formation, reasoning, judgment and decision-making, problem solving, language processing– all parts of human cognition.
    Who can’t figure out to set a goal of dating and how to make that happen? Talk about Method! Put one thought after another in a linear way you can come to a conclusion.

  • I must be missing something big here.

    Yep.

  • Anzlyne

    “Mommies will you do this for your poor befuddled teens, they can’t figure out how to ask someone for a date or to grow a relationship. Talk about helicoptering!”
    In the not so very distant past, mothers ensured that their daughters had a suitable pool of potential dates on which to draw. A bit like beating the covers and driving game, really. Then again, all the beaters and loaders in the world will not make one a good shot.

  • Then again, all the beaters and loaders in the world will not make one a good shot” 🙂
    I appreciate your good humor Michael. Thank you. I do not intend to be harsh: I do see that a whole generation ( or 2 or 3 ) has been tickled and teased and led away. We don’t want another generation to grow up feckless! 😉

  • I’ve read this blog quite a lot over the past year but have never posted. Greetings all!

    Speaking as a young single man, I don’t think that most Catholics understand just how much damage has been done to society by feminism. I and many of my friends would very much like to get married or even merely have a serious relationship. This is not possible. Nearly all of the women of our generation are whores, harlots, and strumpets. Those words tend to offend, but they need to come back. Words have meanings. I’m something of a logician. When we say a word like “bachelor”, we know that term is defined as “unmarried male”. The definition and the term are interchangeable. All bachelors are unmarried males is an analytic proposition. So it is with those terms I mentioned. They’re “hurtful” or “judgmental” but that’s exactly the point, and further, those terms refer to those with dubious moral character in matters of sexuality. The negativity serves a useful social purpose. It dissuades young women from becoming libertines due to social stigma (a stigma which should be binding on both sexes; I was raised to always respect ladies). For a young single Catholic man to find a virtuous young woman, say a practicing Catholic with her virginity intact (much as many of us Catholic men), is like the proverbial needle in the haystack, except the haystack is now basically the size of an aircraft hangar. Good luck. (Just an aside, I’m of the opinion that you should have to earn that white wedding dress. If you want that, you should have the purity it symbolizes.)

    Topping this all off is the near suicidal foolishness of marriage for men in the west. Many people I know are too afraid to date because, as much as they want a marriage, fear being trapped or victimized. Induction in invalid. You don’t know the person you are really getting until after the vows are exchanged, and then it too late. I’ve seen plenty of horror stories there. On top of that, no fault divorce is one of the most insane things ever contrived in western civilization (falling behind abortion and the acceptance of homosexuality, though these are all related). A marriage can just end whenever one spouse (usually the wife) becomes bored or dissatisfied and the other has no say at all. However, these situations nearly always favor the woman. She can use you, and then take your house, your children, half of all of your possession, and half of all the possessions you are ever going to have, sometimes more. Who was crazy enough to think that was a good idea?

    What have been been teaching our young girls in the wake of feminism? Pregnancy is a disease? To be equal to men you must discard your wombs? To be equal to men you must act like the most irresponsible men? Its no wonder that the evils or abortion and homosexuality are so prevalent since we’ve sterilized sex, and reduced to to a mere means for pleasure, while also utterly obliterating the family and any form of shame. Shame is a gift from the Holy Spirit. It informs us when we have chosen to be less than we are.

    I don’t want to go into rant territory, but I probably already have. For those of you blaming the parents, they are limited in their power. We’ve created a completely toxic atmosphere. Our culture is corrosive. The media and schools indoctrinate our young 24/7 and political correctness makes it impossible to criticize anything.

  • Proslogion

    I suppose people viewed marriage rather differently in the past.

    I knew an old country solicitor, who was a testamentary guardian and trustee of a girl, whose father had been killed in WWII. He told me that, when she was about 18, she consulted him about certain funds she was to receive on marriage. It transpired there was an understanding between her and a young man.

    “Marriage, my dear, is a very serious matters,” said my friend, intending, no doubt, a little homily.

    “Oh! But not getting married is much more serious,” interrupted the girl.

    That would have been in the late ’50s or early ’60s. Even then, the expectation that one would marry (coupled with a fear that one might not) was pretty generally shared by both men and women.

    A neighbouring couple have just celebrated their golden wedding. The wife, at 69 is my exact contemporary. Very edifying, but it makes me feel positively antediluvian.

  • Proslogion: wow. Wished I said that. But I would certainly be fired from the institution I worked for and ostracized from the Catholic organizations I volunteer for. That is the status quo now. Catacombs, anyone?

  • Gentlemen,
    .
    You are lawyers, philosophers, economists, priests, and members of academia… and you all seem to despise “Feminism”…which is OK with me.
    .
    But please, may I have a working definition (with particularity) of Feminism so that I might avoid stepping in it when I encounter it?

  • “Nearly all of the women of our generation are whores, harlots, and strumpets.”
    Since you are a logican, who are these women’s partners in sin?

  • Time for comment threading. Motley, Don, Tito, if you are reading this, what is the TAC policy? You may have good reasons for not having threading; please share here or direct me to past explanations. Thanks!

  • I don’t think that the insanity is as widespread as we’ve been lead to believe. Its just that political correctness intimidates people. The lack of courage among the faithful today is shameful, and that applies to me as well. We all can do better. I only got my courage back after losing a childhood friend to these evils, and even then could still stand to improve. We are of the faith where many have been martyred, and we’re afraid of being called names. Oh no! Somebody called me a “bigot” or “sexist” or “homophobe”, I’d better quit! Would that we had the courage of St. Thomas More or those countless other souls who died in emulation of Christ. We slander them when we give in the forces arrayed against us and then call ourselves Christian.

    What’s most bizarre about the contemporary world is that it seems to be devoid of logic. Words have meanings and those words still offend, but their meanings don’t, which is a strange sort of double think. If there is nothing wrong with being promiscuous, and that is “liberating,” then why is “whore” still an offensive word? If there is nothing wrong with having children out of wedlock, why is “bastard” offensive or insulting?

    Apart from the doublethink, the lines keep getting redrawn. It will not stop. I said there is no logic in the contemporary world, but that’s not quite correct. They do seem to understand in their depravity that once sex has been divorced from procreation, there isn’t really anything holding back just about any form of perversion. Homosexuality is quaint and passe. Nowadays we have to deal with polyamory, bestiality (the polite word is “zoophilia”, though the enthusiasts like “furries” call it “yiffing”), and all manner of other evil. Its coming. Its already been the topic of serious discussion and political debate in Europe. If sex is no longer for procreation why get tied down? Fornication results. If it can be shared as a mere means of pleasure, why not contracept? Uh oh, the contraception failed, better murder …er abort the child… er fetus. These folks over in the dark corner like nonprocreative sex too, they just like “nontraditional” forms of it. Nothing is off the table. Its coming. I resent that I often have to waste time arguing against things which are so obviously wrong that its positively astonishing that anybody could view even the mere hypothetical notion as anything less than absurd.

    Slainte, I do not know how I could concisely respond to your request. What is it in particular that you are looking for? There many forms of feminism, and its historical development is something which would require much explanation. Contemporary feminism is where you get the gender theorist nutcases like Judith Butler among among other things. A major problem is the “smokescreen” often employed. Most people seem to think that feminism is the position that men and women are equal. When its presented that way, who could possibly argue with it? However, when you see what that “equality” entails the trouble starts. The devil is in the details. To say that men and women are equal is not to say that they are the same. Further, the “men” with whom the equality is sought are generally those who shame all men with their conduct. Modern feminism tends to lean towards the position that gender is an arbitrary construct. Much of it is self-refuting as well, but again, it would be hard to explain simply or concisely. If you have any particular questions I’d be willing to discuss them.

    Analyze, I expected to receive a response like yours. There are many cases where their partners pressure them. This is common and inexcusable. Most men my age disgust me. You are correct in saying it takes “two to tango” so to speak. I won’t dispute that. However, not all women are angels. You’d be surprised how aggressive feminized women can be. I and many of my friends have had girlfriends who have broken up with us because we would not sleep with them. This culture is toxic to both sexes. The hookup culture is a part of that. This is a lost generation. It has come to be that according to popular sentiment you don’t really “love” someone unless you are willing to sin against purity. Those of us, men and women, who reject that get left out. I was pleased to see that there is a backlash against that and that people are starting to see that “free love” has a cost and that people want more. I just worry that by the time people come to their senses it will be too late. Most of the time to even raise the possibility of criticism is enough to get you attacked.

  • “Nearly all of the women of our generation are whores, harlots, and strumpets. ”

    No, I do not believe that, any more than I believe that nearly all men of the rising generation are sex crazed lay abouts who spend time when they are not having sex playing video games in their mom’s basement. I do think that many young men and women have had poor examples of morality to look at when they were growing from entertainment and often, sadly, from their parents. I also think that most young men and women today want what most young men and women throughout history have wanted: a stable family life and children with a spouse they respect and love. Show people a better way of life in traditional morality and faith in Christ and it is amazing how many will respond positively.

  • Proslogian,
    .
    If a phenomenon like Feminism cannot be defined, it cannot be avoided.
    .
    As a woman, am I guilty of being a Feminist if I join a profession, or compete with a man for an available position, or take the initiative in paying a bill? To some men, any or all of these endeavors qualify a woman as a Feminist.
    .
    Recognize that many women do not want to be tarred with the term, yet remain unclear how to avoid it. I’m one of them.
    .
    By example, when I first began practicing law in the late 80s, women were barred from wearing trousers to work. We were obliged by the managing partner, who was male, to wear skirt suits or dresses. This was a large law firm in Manhattan.
    .
    While times have changed, the term Feminist continues to bring opprobrium upon women, many of whom really don’t want the label but cannot seem to avoid it. Hence my request for a definition.

  • By example, when I first began practicing law in the late 80s, women were barred from wearing trousers to work. We were obliged by the managing partner, who was male, to wear skirt suits or dresses. This was a large law firm in Manhattan.

    Of course he did. Pantsuits are ugly. Look at Hillary Clinton.

  • Hence my request for a definition.

    Try this, from Helen Smith: the habit of looking at the world with the assumption that “women have options; and men have obligations”.

  • I agree that ” This culture is toxic to both sexes.” And to all age groups, and to any demographic we can think of. That is why I say it is important to Think Teaching teens to date may be great, but we have really spun away from basic understanding.
    I agree we need virtue- strength for the Good.

  • Art Deco,
    .
    Re: “women have options; and men have obligations”.
    .
    Men sue women for Alimony too …especially when the woman is a rain maker.
    .
    Your quote is thus not universally operable; and it has never been applicable to me.
    .
    I have voluntarily assumed obligations (because I was raised to do so) and I have never asked a man (other than my father) for a single cent.
    .
    Am I still a Feminist?

  • Art Deco: “…Of course he did. Pantsuits are ugly”..
    .
    Maybe so…but try running from one Court in Nassau County in the morning, then to another Court in Manhattan in the early afternoon, then to a closing at another destination later in day…all in a skirt and heels.
    .
    Not unlike Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire…she did everything he did but backwards and in heels.

  • “Not unlike Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire…she did everything he did but backwards and in heels.”

    Leading isn’t a ball of cotton candy either. In regard to the court room attire of my sistren of the bar I never give advice. I am merely thankful that each business day I put on my black coat, black pants, black tie, black socks, black shoes and white shirt without any hard wardrobe choices awaiting me!

  • In regard to contemporary, as opposed to 19th century and early 20th century feminism when there were many legitimate grievances, feminism, I think it can be summed up in this phrase: “Only women count, and I count more than any other woman.” It is a creed of self centeredness in a wrapper of self serving bloviation. More than a few men live by a mirror image creed.

  • Men sue women for Alimony too …especially when the woman is a rain maker.

    1. Given that only 4% of divorce decrees include an award of alimony, I tend to doubt this is much of a social problem.

    2. A grand total of 0.7% of the workforce have law licenses. The share who work for firms with designated rainmakers is modest. The number of rainmakers is smaller still. The number of lady rainmakers smaller still.

    Flannery O’Connor said that literature deals in the possible, not the probable. Literature is not sociology.

    all in a skirt and heels.

    He banned flat shoes too? Inneresting…

  • I think it can be summed up in this phrase: “Only women count, and I count more than any other woman.

    I’m recalling one of the lady professors so incensed at Lawrence Summers’ remarks about women in the sciences. I gather she doesn’t give a rat’s patoot about the demographics of special education classes.

  • Mr. McClarey writes, “Only women count, and I count more than any other woman.”
    .
    Your definition of Feminism is a destructive form of narcissism. It’s fundamentally at odds with a woman’s instinctive nature to engage humility, charity, self sacrifice, generosity, and nurturing. It’s corrosive of her humanity and that of her husband and family. I reject it.
    .
    Regarding pantsuits….even when it was deemed permissible to wear trousers at work most of my friends who were litigators would not wear them to Court…we were never quite sure whether it might cause prejudice to our client before a more traditional judge.
    .
    So the skirts and heels lasted well for a very long time…not sure when Hilary Clinton made the switch. : )

  • Art Deco wrote:
    .
    “….2. A grand total of 0.7% of the workforce have law licenses. The share who work for firms with designated rainmakers is modest. The number of rainmakers is smaller still. The number of lady rainmakers smaller still.”
    .
    Then you are exchanging with a very rare lady rainmaker….me. I would suggest you recalibrate your stats for Manhattan professionals. Methinks Flannery O’Connor hailed from the South…Georgia maybe…not quite the same.
    .
    “…all in a skirt and heels. – He banned flat shoes too? Inneresting…”
    .
    I never asked him about flats; the dress code was in writing. I wore what every other female attorney wore at the firm…usually pinstripe blazers, narrow matching skirts to mid-calf, white silk blouses, white or beige tights, and heels. Makeup was toned down and hair worn shoulder length. Eventually women began wearing white ankle socks over their tights and sneakers to and from the subway. Times have changed.

  • Art Deco..on More feminism:

    http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2014/05/more_on_vassars_rigged_sex_hea.html
    .
    The proceeding and its findings should be appealed from given what appears to be a number of procedural errors in excluding exculpatory evidence which, if admitted, might have exonerated Mr. Yu.
    .
    None of us were present at the hearing; we don’t know the parties, the facts, or the circumstances of the matter other than as reported in the article you attach. Reserve judgment; don’t assume the worse.

  • I take it you did not read the article. Every aspect of the proceeding was bollocks and salient exculpatory evidence ignored. These Star Chamber scandals are banal and Dr. Johnson has been writing about them for years. You have two problems: academics lack the skill set to do this sort of work; and they and not conscientious. I used to work in that setting. You would not believe the crap seemingly sane people on faculties subscribe to, but less the manifest head cases.

  • So much of this is due to collapse of social mores specific to nationalities, the break between generations, and American cultural dominance. I cannot be the only person here whose ancestors, in living memory, did not speak English as a first language; lived in (sometimes) self-imposed ghettos and worked often with others with similar immigrations. Marriage seems to start declining right around the time the old “Italian neighborhoods” and “Irish neighborhoods” and “black neighborhoods” start disappearing and the children cannot meaningfully speak to, or of, their grandparents or any generation that came before them. My own experience is that it is extremely hard to integrate oneself into another culture for the sake of marriage- even one that in theory is very similar to my own, it’s very easy to see the unspoken customs that held marriage in high esteem washed away in such confusions.

  • Interesting to think what precipitated feminism and what made it take the turns it has. There is anger on the part of both sexes, and sometimes that anger is really a personal problem- the way a man or woman has experienced the other sex in his or her own individual life.
    To bring this back a bit to the dating template given students mentioned in this post, I see that what the teacher is trying to basically communicate to young novice daters is respect. R E S P E C T.

  • Marriage seems to start declining right around the time the old “Italian neighborhoods” and “Irish neighborhoods” and “black neighborhoods”

    No shortage of black neighborhoods in this country.

  • Art Deco writes, “….I take it you did not read the article”…
    .
    I promise I read the article in its entirety before responding to you. I also noted that the findings resulted in a purported “black mark” on Mr. Yu’s record. I think Mr. Yu should consult with counsel who will probably advise (and maybe prepare) him for the internal appeal process by Vassar, including establishing an appropriate paper trail, to pave the path for a civil action for damages against the university and, if applicable, his accuser for willful and/or negligent conduct which may have caused material damage to Mr. Yu’s personal and professional reputation.
    .
    We do not know enough about the accuser or her mental state to definitively dispose of her claims. Nor do we know enough about Mr. Yu’s to sustain his objections.
    .
    Presumably the author of the newspaper/blog profits from his work. The greater notoriety a story provides, the more profits it churns. While the author may be a perfectly credible individual, he also may have missed some relevant information which did not make it into his report. For these reasons, I recomment caution in drawing adverse conclusions.
    .
    If the girl did act viciously or irresponsibly, she is a jerk and should be punished. I am not siding with her because she is a woman.

  • “I’m of the opinion that you should have to earn that white wedding dress. If you want that, you should have the purity it symbolizes. ”

    Just for the record, the white wedding dress became popular in the mid-19th century English-speaking world primarily because Queen Victoria got married in one and as a means to show off, not the bride’s purity, but her family’s wealth. From Wikipedia:

    “Royal brides before Victoria did not typically wear white, instead choosing heavy brocaded gowns embroidered with white and silver thread, with red being a particularly popular colour in Western Europe more generally. European and American brides had been wearing a plethora of colours, including blue, yellow, and practical colours like black, brown, or gray.

    “As accounts of Victoria’s wedding spread across the Atlantic and throughout Europe, elites followed her lead. Because of the limitations of laundering techniques, white dresses provided an opportunity for conspicuous consumption. They were favored primarily as a way to show the world that the bride’s family was so wealthy and so firmly part of the leisure class that the bride would choose an elaborate dress that could be ruined by any sort of work or spill. The colour white was also the colour girls were required to wear at the time when they were presented to the court.

    “Etiquette books then began to turn the practice into a tradition and the white gown soon became a popular symbol of status that also carried “a connotation of innocence and sexual purity…. By the end of the 19th century the white dress was the garment of choice for elite brides on both sides of the Atlantic. However, middle-class British and American brides did not adopt the trend fully until after World War II. ”

    Now you may be wondering, so what? The issue being discussed in this thread isn’t the color of wedding gowns, but the loss of mutual respect and regard for the virtue of chastity among young single men and women. Well, I think these issues might be somewhat related. You see, the white wedding dress is not, ultimately, a symbol of chastity; it is a symbol of middle/upper class respectability. Virtue and respectability are not the same; though they do often go together, they should never be mistaken for one another. Note that hardly anyone, even in the Victorian Era, seemed to care about whether the groom was a virgin prior to marriage because that was not essential to respectability for a man (he could fool around prior to marriage and even to some extent afterward so long as he was discreet about it and confined his wanderings to, say, an occasional visit to a brothel).

    Which brings me to my next point. Chastity and virginity are NOT always the same thing either. As one of my favorite speakers on the subject, Mary Beth Bonacci, liked to say in her talks, “Virginity is about your past; chastity is about your present and future.” Someone who is not a virgin due to having led a sinful life in the past, or having made one or a few lapses in judgment, or having been raped or molested through no fault of her own, can be leading a chaste life here and now. Perhaps she might appreciate the virtue of chastity even more, having learned from bitter experience that it is not enslaving but liberating. I see no reason to exclude such a person from consideration as a future spouse.

  • Anzlyne,
    Indeed. Respect for others and self-respect for oneself.

  • Slainté wrote, “[T]ry running from one Court in Nassau County in the morning, then to another Court in Manhattan in the early afternoon, then to a closing at another destination later in day…all in a skirt and heels.”

    That is why, in both Scotland and France, we have robbing rooms.

    Donald M McClarey
    French avocats can wear pretty well anything under their robes
    http://www.ponsard-dumas.com/images/stories/Produits/avocat.jpg

    Alas! In Scotland, ours are open at the front
    http://www.advocates.org.uk/images/advocatewalking.jpg

    Our judges’ robes are more all-enveloping
    http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02347/nimmo_2347588b.jpg
    (the one on the right, with the ermine, is the Lord Justice-General)

    Specially for Slainté, I can’t resist posting this girl wearing the “pricked” robe of the Lord Justice Clerk on school visit
    http://photos1.blogger.com/img/46/1979/1024/TZRobeshandsfolded.jpg

    Boys were not left out
    http://photos1.blogger.com/img/46/1979/1024/RomeRobesPortrait1.jpg

  • Elaine Krewer
    There are countless depictions of pre-19th century depictions of weddings in paintings and illuminated mss and you are right, there is no uniformity of colour at all. Even the wedding veil cannot be clearly identified. Brides seem to have worn whatever was the customary female headdress of the period. Some Breton brides still wear national costume, including those delightful confections once worn by the Sisters of Charity (which was the ordinary peasant costume at the time of their foundation – They were not supposed to look like nuns)
    Now, Roman brides wore a full-length veil, known as the flammeum or, more commonly by the plural form, flammea. It means flame-coloured and may have been orange, although both Pliny and Lucan (Plin. Nat. 21.46; Lucan 2.361 ) call it leutea or saffron. Of course, Greek and Latin names for colours are notoriously difficult to translate. The Romans, for example, saw red and brown as two shades of the same colour and the Greeks called gloss and matt by different names.
    As for respectability and chastity, one recalls Miss Anscombe’s laconic, “In one word: Christianity taught that men ought to be as chaste as pagans thought honest women ought to be; the contraceptive morality teaches that women need to be as little chaste as pagans thought men need be. “

  • MPS, forgive the rudeness but:
    .
    i. With what frequency are the robes laundered?
    .
    ii. Does each robe belong exclusively to one attorney or is it worn by others?
    .
    iii. what are those ratty wigs made of? Horse hair? Are they optional?
    .
    I think perhaps I may have been too quick to complain about skirts and heels. 🙂
    .
    By the way, it was not lost on me that you completely dodged the definition of Feminism.

  • Slainté asked:

    i. With what frequency are the robes laundered? – Seldom, if ever, in some cases. Slightly shabby makes the wearer look experienced.
    .
    ii. Does each robe belong exclusively to one attorney or is it worn by others? – They are frequently handed down by retiring advocates or those taking silk (appointed QC) to favoured juniors. So are judicial robes.
    .
    iii. what are those ratty wigs made of? Horse hair? Are they optional? – Originally, they were made of human hair, but in 1822, Humphrey Ravenscroft developed one of horse hair, that did not require “frizzing, curling, perfuming or powdering.” Messrs Ede & Ravenscroft are still the leading forensic Perruquiers. They mellow in colour with age and, again, are often passed on. I believe some are made from synthetic material.and others contain a mohair mix.

    When ladies were first admitted to the Faculty of Advocates, there was a proposal that they be allowed to wear the biretta, like French avocats. It is the continental version of the mortar-board, but nothing came of it.

  • Slainté
    Feminism I find rather confusing. In the UK (and, I believe, the US) feminists demand gender-neutral job titles; in France, they demand feminised ones – hence, the government directive, « Femme, j’écris ton nom » [Woman, I write your name] The Academy, however, insists that gender is a quality of words and sex is a quality of things; thus, « le juge, » « le professeur » are masculine nouns and « la personne, » « la recrue, » [the recruit] « la vigie, » or « la sentinelle » [both = the sentry] are feminine nouns, regardless of the sex of the individual referred to.
    By the by, my French law agent’s wife was a junior minister in the Jospin government that produced the guide and she was perfectly happy with « Mme le ministre » Indeed, when I was due to meet the Dean of Faculty (le Bâtonnier) of the Paris Bar, she actually reminded me to call her, « Mme LE Bâtonnier »
    I am still not quite sure how to respond, when a female avocat (avocate?) begins a letter to me, « Mon cher confrère »

  • @Elaine, precisely. Perhaps she might appreciate the virtue of chastity even more, having learned from bitter experience that it is not enslaving but liberating. I see no reason to exclude such a person from consideration as a future spouse.

    What appeals about Cronin’s class at BC is the criterion that a date cannot involve alcohol, kissing, or sex.

    @Proslogion, “when you’re going through hell, keep going.” Keep asking likely young women out on dates, regardless of their real or imagined past. The ones who respond positively to a date built around a daytime activity that ends chastely, are the ones you are looking for, aren’t they? And, it sounds like the ones who are waiting to be looked for may be the same ones you are looking for.

  • MPS responds to my urgent inquiry, “…With what frequency are the robes laundered? – Seldom, if ever…”
    .
    Oh yikes…methinks I will play the ugly American and shrug off the robe, or alternatively, just bring my own freshly laundered one. It works well for me to look crisp and clean and not so experienced; I could also supplement with horn rimmed spectacles. In fact, most women attorneys I know would opt for the “not so experienced look”. : ) 
    .
    MPS opines on all things horsey, including ratty wigs, to wit: “…in 1822, Humphrey Ravenscroft developed one of horse hair, that did not require “frizzing, curling, perfuming or powdering.”
    .
    I know that this will come as a shock to your sensibilities MPS but frizzing and curling collectively constitute a “bad hair day” for most women attorneys and is a condition to be avoided at all costs. Hence, the horsey hair solution was a stroke of genius by Mr. Humphrey Ravenscroft who surely and presciently anticipated the admission of women to the bar. Notwithstanding, there is no way that I am wearing a horsey wig that has crowned the head of so many other unknown avocats who, God forbid, may have suffered from dandruff, or worse, from modernist liberalism!
    .
    As a practical alternative, I recommend my niece’s dancing wig; an undeniably viable and hygienic solution…what say you MPS? http://www.pinterest.com/pin/44191640063685275/
    .
    As for “perfuming or powdering”….in charity, and to avoid being viewed as an absolute and total whiner, I support perfuming subject to the perfumer’s use of Chanel No. 5 or Christian Dior’s “Miss Dior”, and the powder, of course, must be by Nina Ricci. Of course, male attorneys, upon returning home in the evening, may face some inquisitorial questioning by their wives as to why they smell so….well…pretty.
    .
    All things considered, and after this long excursion into international lawyer apparel courtesy of MPS, I now appreciate my old employer’s skirt and heels mandate. No more complaints from me.

  • MPS:
    .
    In New York, male and female attorneys are addressed as, Mary Smith, Esq. or John Smith, Esq. One addresses correspondence to another attorney, not of one’s acquaintance, as Dear Ms. Smith or Dear Mr. Smith. Judges in state supreme or federal courts are referred to as “Your Honor” or “Judge Smith”.
    .
    I have corresponded with judges using the following form of address:
    .
    The Honorable Justice Mary Smith
    Judge of the New York State Supreme Court
    New York State Supreme Court
    60 Centre Street, 9th Floor
    New York, New York 10007

    Re: ACS Corp. v. COD Corp.
    Index No. 12345/2014

    Dear Judge Smith:
    .
    In Connecticut, male and female attorneys address each other as “Attorney Smith” notwithstanding the person’s sex, and this form of address is apparently used for all purposes within the Connecticut Court system as well as in correspondence between attorneys. As I don’t practice in Connecticut, I find it strange when a Connecticut practicioner addresses me as Attorney _____.
    .
    Thanks for your feedback on the issue of Feminism. The issue generated so much vitriol over at Crisis that o two occassions I just conceded my points and slowly retreated. I don’t think many women view themselves as feminists, while their male counterparts certainly do. It saddens me that men are profoundly hurt by its effects.
    .
    I am grateful to those who have provided feedback on this issue and will make every effort to become more sensitive to my male colleagues and friends so as to not give offense.
    .
    As I don’t speak French, MPS, I have no words of wisdom for you Mon cher confrère. : )

  • MPS, Thanks to your insightful comments, I shall replay all my Rumpole of the Bailey, and some Morse and Lewis DVDs and impress my husband with this new knowledge regarding grooming and courtroom dress of barristers, soliciters, and judges.
    -Cynthia

  • Slainté

    Thank you for the charming photo of your niece’s wig. In the 17th century, men would have worn something not dissimilar and forensic wigs were originally simply the ordinary dress of the period.

    The advantage of legal costume, like, say, hunting pink, is that it spares one the labour of puzzling over what to wear. Just look at Royal Ascot; the poor ladies must have devoted hours and days to selecting their frocks and hats, whilst their male counterparts just get out their morning suits and grey toppers. Worse, they have to repeat the exercise year after year. Perhaps, the feminists should insist on attending balls in white tie and tails, whilst the couturiers of Paris besiege the Hôtel de Ville [town hall] demanding bread.

    CAM

    The excellent programmes you mention depict English legal costume, which is subtly different. Their judges, in particular are quite drab, compared to ours (and their wigs, unlike barristers, do not have curls – perhaps, they are seen as to frivolous)

  • MPS writes, “…Perhaps, the feminists should insist on attending balls in white tie and tails, whilst the couturiers of Paris besiege the Hôtel de Ville [town hall] demanding bread…”
    .
    The feminists wouldn’t dare!….I stand resolutely in support of the couturiers of Paris who, through their creative genius and innovative dress design, bring forth a woman’s beauty precisely by causing her to radiate her own unique femininity.
    .
    Was there a time when barristers in Scotland wore the kilt to practice before the Courts of law?

  • Slainté asked, “Was there a time when barristers in Scotland wore the kilt to practice before the Courts of law?”
    Good Heavens, No! Until Queen Victoria’s time, they would have seen the kilt as the badge of a cattle thief.
    The kilt or philibeg (Gaelic fēileadh beag) acquired it romantic image as a result of Sir Walter Scott’s novels and as the dress of the Highland Regiments.

  • MPS writes: “…Good Heavens, No! Until Queen Victoria’s time, they would have seen the kilt as the badge of a cattle thief. The kilt or philibeg (Gaelic fēileadh beag) acquired it romantic image as a result of Sir Walter Scott’s novels and as the dress of the Highland Regiments…”
    .
    Well, MPS, when and if you Scots ever get around to finally reclaiming your popular heritage independent of the kingdom to your south, you, sir, might wish to consider sponsoring legislation which would restore Scots Gaelic as your official language and the kilt as de rigeur for all barristers practicing law before the Courts of Scotland.
    .
    I am not convinced the character Dick the butcher envisioned much difference between lawyers everywhere and cattle thieves when Shakespeare caused him to say, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.” Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2, 71–78
    .
    Kilts are a symbol of a dignified and honorable Scots Highland heritage and should be treated with the level of respect due its owners who were eschewed for being who they were, Catholic Gaels.
    .
    Hopefully we’ve moved on from those times. At least this proud daughter of Irish Gaels hopes so. I would gladly wear the kilt… even with heels. : )

  • The root problem is not a matter of gender or feminism, but a loss of knowledge of the fundamentals of our faith. What constitutes mortal sin and what its consequences are is rarely mentioned in church or even in Catholic schools. The need for sacramental confession is not stressed. Fear of hell will stop a lot of bad behavior, but few are taught what actions can cost them entrance into heaven.

    The first mortal sin many people commit is missing Sunday mass intentionally. Once the sanctifying grace is gone, that person becomes extremely vulnerable to further serious sins and to being deceived by the devil. Our country is suffering from such loss of wisdom on a massive scale.

    The solution is to revive teaching the fundamentals: regular confession, ASAP if mortal sin committed; mass every Sunday (or vigil) and holy day of obligation; avoid all mortal sin like the plague it is. Pray the rosary daily for strength. Catholics don’t know these things any more.

  • Well said Proslogion!

The “spirit of adolescent progressivism” and the commencement season at the nation’s Catholic universities and colleges…

Friday, May 16, AD 2014

 

It’s commencement season in U.S. Catholic higher education, that time of year when administrators of the so-called “independent” Catholic universities and colleges can take advantage of the annual opportunity to “thumb their noses” at the Church and Her teaching.

The truth be told, those administrators don’t actually thumb their noses. Instead, they invite speakers with pedigrees aligning them with the “progressive forces of worldliness,” to quote Pope Francis. The speakers then do the thumbing for the administrators, as they sit on the dais and applaud.

Consider this year’s commencement speaker at Villanova University, Dr. Jill Biden.

The wife of Vice President Joe Biden, Dr. Biden is being honored for her work as an educator, supporter of military families and veterans, and breast cancer prevention. So far, so good! Dr. Biden also earned an M.A. in English at Villanova. Even better yet!

However, the University’s announcement of Dr. Biden’s invitation didn’t mention her support for abortion, for the proliferation and use of artificial forms of birth control (some of which are abortafacients), and for so-called “homosexual marriage.” Check it all out at LifesiteNews.com.

Administrators at Villanova likely would reply to critics that Dr. Biden’s invitation evidences their unwavering, personal commitment to “the tradition of Catholic higher education [that] has always placed a priority on the integration of the pursuit of intellectual excellence and ethical conversions essential for the integration of knowledge and faith.” Furthermore, those administrators likely would assert that this invitation demonstrates their commitment to “the sacredness of individual conscience [that] must find a secure place in the discourse with a Catholic, Augustinian university.”

In her speech, even if Dr. Biden wasn’t to mention any of her personal beliefs that are contrary to Church teaching, it will be eminently clear to everyone in the audience what those beliefs are. After all, that’s why administrators of the independent Catholic universities and colleges exercise such great care and oversight when inviting commencement speakers. In this case, Dr. Jill Biden will clarify for graduates the administrators’ loyalty to those cherished Catholic and Augustinian values as well as what those values should mean for graduates in the existential practice of their lives as they commence forth into the world beyond Villanova.

Yes, indeed. “Ethical conversions” and “the sacredness of individual conscience”—cherished institutional values.

Especially at a Catholic university, should it not be asked: “Ethical conversions to what ?” and “Individual conscience guided by what ?” And, especially at an Augustinian university, should it not also be asked: “Supported by what truth ?”

During a daily homily as Pope Francis was describing the Maccabean persectuion, he noted how when the people of God live in a foreign and alien culture, they oftentimes prefer to distance themselves from the Lord in favor of worldly proposals. These proposals, he said, are the root of evil. This preference then leads the people of God to abandon their sacred traditions as they negotiate their loyalty to God. This is “apostasy—a form of “adultery” the Pope said—that transpires as the people of God negotiate the essence of their being: loyalty to the Lord. This attitude of adolescent progressivism, he said, is the attitude “is a fruit of the devil who makes his way forward with the spirit of secular worldliness.”

Just two weeks ago, the University’s pro-life group, Villanovans for Life, celebrated its 40th anniversary. This student organization has evidenced a legacy of unwavering loyalty to Catholic and Augustinian values rooted in Church teaching. In contrast, the invitation to Dr. Jill Biden evidences the spirit of adolescent progressivism, as the University—like so many other independent Catholic institutions—seeks to be part of the secular world and promotes  its spirit.

 

 

To read the LifesiteNews.com article, click on the following link:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/villanova-announces-2014-commencement-speaker-jill-biden-the-pro-abortion-w

To read the text of Pope Francis’ comments about adolescent progressivism, click on the following link:
http://www.romereports.com/pg154748-pope-adolescent-progressivism-protects-human-sacrifices-en

The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

17 Responses to The “spirit of adolescent progressivism” and the commencement season at the nation’s Catholic universities and colleges…

  • It continues as such because those with leverage ( financial donors) continue to support these universities and those with voices remain silent.
    .
    Liberalism is progressive and it will continue to transform these universities away from Catholicism until the name of the university is the only evidence of a once noble past. As alumni, we can help turn the tide and reclaim Catholicism for our universities.

  • Why not?

    Most of the newly-minted graduates had their minds bleached for four years. [sigh]

  • Maybe it’s time to dispense with “celebrity” commencement speakers.

  • Thanks Motley, I’ve got my reading material for the day: Maccabees.

  • Well, as I prepare to attend the Villanova commencement exercises, I want to share the following:

    1) As you note, Villanova cherishes the inviolability of conscience.

    2) It has invited a pro-abortion public figure to speak at commencement and receive an honorary degree

    3) Villanova contractually obligates all faculty to attend the commencement exercises.

    4) I, and many Villanova faculty, am adamantly pro-life, as should be every faculty member at any genuinely Catholic university.

    So, er, question to President Fr. Peter, OSA: Where’s my freedom of conscience? I’m pretty sure I’ve just been asked to violate it.

  • Doctor Butler,

    Thank you for your contribution to this forum.
    .
    One wonders whether faculty members and administrators at Villanova would swear the Oath of Fidelity to the Magisterium which is presently being administered to faculty and administrators at the Franciscan University of Steubenville)? The Oath is as follows:
    .
    I, _____________N., with firm faith believe and profess each and everything that is contained in the Symbol of faith, namely:
    .
    I believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
    .
    With firm faith, I also believe everything contained in the word of God, whether written or handed down in Tradition, which the Church, either by a solemn judgment or by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, sets forth to be believed as divinely revealed.
    .
    I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals.
    .
    Moreover, I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.
    .
    I, __________________N., in assuming the office of ………, promise that in my words and in my actions I shall always preserve communion with the Catholic Church.
    With great care and fidelity I shall carry out the duties incumbent on me toward the Church, both universal and particular, in which, according to the provisions of the law, I have been called to exercise my service.
    .
    In fulfilling the charge entrusted to me in the name of the Church, I shall hold fast to the deposit of faith in its entirety; I shall faithfully hand it on and explain it, and I shall avoid any teachings contrary to it.
    .
    I shall follow and foster the common discipline of the entire Church and I shall maintain the observance of all ecclesiastical laws, especially those contained in the Code of Canon Law.
    .
    With Christian obedience I shall follow what the Bishops, as authentic doctors and teachers of the faith, declare, or what they, as those who govern the Church, establish. I shall also faithfully assist the diocesan Bishops, so that the apostolic activity, exercised in the name and by mandate of the Church, may be carried out in communion with the Church.
    .
    So help me God, and God’s Holy Gospels on which I place my hand.
    .

    Source: http://www.franciscan.edu/Philosophy/OathofFidelity/

  • I guess the pope and I are just on different wave lengths. When I think of Judas the Hammer Maccabee I certainly do Not think of weakly going along with the world!

  • slainte.
    Beautiful oath.
    Extraordinary Truths.
    Great suggestion.

  • Villanova University’s fund raising campaign seeks to raise $600 million dollars……a link to its campaign video is below.
    .
    Noticeably absent from the video is any reference to Jesus Christ, the university’s Catholic mission, or a Catholic collegiate tradition.
    .
    The following introductory statement precedes the video:
    .
    “Experience everything Villanova has to offer in a fast-paced video that highlights Villanova’s gorgeous campus, nationally-ranked colleges, exciting athletics, our commitment to service and, of course, our amazing students. At Homecoming 2013, the University will launch a historic capital campaign to propel Villanova into the national spotlight. Join us as we Ignite Change For the Greater Great and celebrate the Villanova community!”
    .
    http://youtu.be/50_7DoOhZBU

  • Ignite HOPE and CHANGE? Didn’t we do that in 2008 and 2012? It is a good thing that the ACLU hasn’t forced Villanova to remove the crosses atop the church. Somebody might be offended.

  • I am sure, Slainte, that a dozen, perhaps as many as two dozen faculty at Villanova could swear that oath, myself included. For the rest, well, they would be too busy working to dissolve the confidence in faith and reason of their students to be bothered believing anything themselves.

    Villanova as a whole is a more faithful Catholic university than most — and, alas, I shudder to think what it would be like to teach at those that are less faithful!

  • Professor Butler—thank you for your witness on behalf of Villanova. My communication to Father Donohue regarding this disgraceful decision went unanswered…..and so too shall any requests by VU for money be handled in kind. Perhaps, and your comment suggests, VU has long been traveling the road most commonly travelled, turn left on progressive street until
    you fall off the cliff, but it went unnoticed by many alumni until now. I thanked Father Donohue for the brutal revelation. I wonder though was there not a twinge of irony as Jill Biden was given her honorary degree knowing that she and her husband advocated for the ACA with its pernicious redefinition of freedom of religion to freedom of worship.

  • Thomas Butler, I wasn’t able to locate your name among Villanova University faculty; probably just an error on my part. In which of the colleges are you a member of faculty and what is your area of expertise?

  • I think it is eminently fair for any donor, especially one donating a significant sum of money to any Catholic university, to make his/her donation contingent upon the university adopting and implementing (among its faculty and administrators) the Oath of Fidelity to the Magisterium in a form substantially similar to that which is administered to faculty and administrators at the Franciscan University of Steubenville.
    .
    If donors joined together across Catholic academia in making this Oath a universal requirement for employment in Catholic universities, your efforts in defense of the faith would resonate profoundly with university administrations.
    .
    This is a simple but significant first step in the right direction to restore Catholicism to Catholic academia.

  • #1. Where is the bishop?

    #2. Where is the Jesuit Superior?

    #3. Why hasn’t Pope Francis suppressed the Jesuits yet? If Nixon could go to China…

  • “Thomas Butler” is an anagram intended to protect the innocent.

    If alumni were vocal on this, I’m reasonably confident the President would listen — after all, we are tuition driven. But, on average, they are not; Villanova, on average, tends to recruit students who are lukewarm in their Catholicism, and so I am not hopeful that the sort of critical mass that would gain a hearing could be mustered. I’ll pray for it, though!

  • Pingback: Why a Wealth Tax Won't Work - God & Caesar

William Peter Blatty, Georgetown, and the Congregation for Catholic Education: Headed for the circular file?

Wednesday, May 14, AD 2014

 

The narrative is pretty common today. An alumnus of a Catholic university believes his Alma Mater is failing to uphold in a significant and meaningful way her Catholic identity. So, this alumnus collects signatories on a petition and sends the petition to the members of the institution’s Board and administration. All of which goes nowhere, as everyone decides to ignore the stormy petrils.

This particular narrative takes a different turn, however, as the alumnus is William Peter Blatty—author of The Exorcist—whose Alma Mater is Georgetown University. Moreover, rather than have his petition go nowhere except into the circular file, Blatty decides to exercise his canonical rights, sending his petition containing 2k+ names to the Congregation for Catholic Education (CCE) asking that the Congregation “require that Georgetown implement Ex corde Ecclesiae, a papal constitution governing Catholic colleges.” Failing that, the petition asked the Congregation to strip Georgetown of its right to call itself Catholic and Jesuit. Let there be not doubt: Blatty is serious. He believes that neither Georgetown’s faculty nor its students are exemplary of the faith.

In a letter sent to Blatty dated April 4, 2014, the CCE’s Secretary, Archbishop Angelo Zani, stated that CCE cannot grant Blatty’s request for “hierarchic recourse” because Blatty is not able to demonstrate that he has “suffered an objective change in his/her condition due to an administrative act.” However, Zani did write:

Your communications to this dicastery in the matter of Georgetown University…constitute a well-founded complaint. Our congregation is taking the issue seriously and is cooperating with the Society of Jesus in this regard.

(click on the image below to read the letter in its entirety.)

cec letter

At this time, precisely what Archbishop Zani has in mind when he states that CCE is “taking the issue seriously” and is “cooperating with the Society of Jesus [SJ] in this regard” is impossible to know from those phrases. Is CCE sufficiently serious enough in this issue to bring pressure upon SJ leadership in Rome to introduce the kind of changes at Georgetown that Blatty seeks? Or, lacking “hierarchic recourse,” is CCE going to communicate with SJ leadership in Rome (perhaps over a very nice lunch and glass of wine) and then place Blatty’s canonical petition in the circular file, Archbishop Zani having done what said he would do?

One thing is for certain: Administrators at Georgetown are unrepentant. According to Inside Higher Ed, a Georgetown spokeswoman, Rachel Pugh, wrote in an email that the University has received no formal correspondence from the Vatican regarding the petition, and that Georgetown’s Catholic identity “has never been stronger.”

Perhaps the petition has already been placed in the circular file.

 

 

To read the Inside Higher Ed article, click on the following link:
http://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2014/05/14/vatican-responds-criticism-georgetown-u#ixzz31hSL4lqW

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
http://www.richard-jacobs-blog.com/omnibus.html

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

18 Responses to William Peter Blatty, Georgetown, and the Congregation for Catholic Education: Headed for the circular file?

  • Stay with it Blatty!
    Don’t give up!
    Some demons need more time than others to be expelled from a body.
    Heck! You already know that!
    It’s going to take nine or ten defenders of the faith organizing similar efforts across the country to call the CCE to the mat. Let’s help where we can.
    Let the CCE know that enough is enough.
    That the Universities will be Catholic in whole, or not Catholic in title.

    Blatty. Don’t give up! Let the heads spin and vomit flow until the demons exit.

  • Georgetown covered its crucifixes as a concession to Obama’s White House. Does anyone really believe that Blatty’s petition alone will cause college administrators who have denied Christ to sit up and take notice?
    .
    Nope…the alumni and all other donors must refuse to fund Georgetown’s endowment. No restoration of Catholicism…no money.

  • slainte: “Nope…the alumni and all other donors must refuse to fund Georgetown’s endowment. No restoration of Catholicism…no money.”
    .
    This works.
    .
    Georgetown covered Jesus’ name to satisfy Obama. Full one third of the student body and one half of the faculty on stage removed themselves when Cardinal Arinze spoke against homosexual behavior. Evidently, the student body is not being inculcated with Catholic principles or manners. This precipitated Notre Dame giving Obama an honorary degree for denying the posterity of our nation.
    .
    They will never know how much money they will not be getting.

  • Georgetown? Catholic? When?

  • Mary DeVoe writes, “…They will never know how much money they will not be getting.”
    .
    Sure they will Mary especially if Mr. Blatty makes his case to Georgetown’s generous alumni and petitions them to redirect their donations to the Franciscan University of Steubenville instead of Georgetown….of course all the while providing a copy of said check(s) with an explanatory memo to the President of Georgetown Univ. and to Mr. Blatty.

  • Penguins Fan writes, “Georgetown? Catholic? When?”
    .
    Now that you mention it…W. Peter Blatty did write “The Exorcist”, not the “Passion of the Christ”…maybe the Catholicism problem at Georgetown has been going on for much longer than we realized. : )

  • Yes it may be canned in the round file, but as slainte says there can be well thought out follow up.
    What would really be great would be to convert or “re”vert those Catholics in charge at Georgetown… and Notre Dame etc, etc. There is always hope!

  • Slainté wrote, “the alumni and all other donors must refuse to fund Georgetown’s endowment. No restoration of Catholicism…no money..”

    What of the existing endowments?

    Bear with me3, if I recall some remarks from the famous Scottish case of Bannatyne v Overtoun [[1904] AC 515] known as the Free Church case.
    A small dissenting minority claimed that the Free Church had departed from certain principles enshrined in its founding documents and that the endowments of the Church, subscribed for the support of Free Church principles belonged to the minority that maintained them, rather than to those who had abandoned them.

    The Lord Chancellor, Lord Halsbury, put the matter succinctly, when he said that “when men subscribe money for a particular object, and leave it behind them for the promotion of that object, their successors have no right to change the object endowed,” for “there is nothing in calling an associated body a Church that exempts it from the legal obligations of insisting that money given for one purpose shall not be devoted to another.”

    Likewise, Lord Alverstone CJ said that He was unable “to support a judgment which would deprive the persons, forming a minority, of their rights, simply on the ground that they are unwilling to become members of a body which has not only abandoned the fundamental principles of the Church to which they belong, but supports a principle essentially different from that on which the Church was founded.”

    Substitute “university” for “church” and the reasoning remains equally valid. Those entrusted with money or other assets for a special and limited purpose have no right, “wickedly and feloniously, and in breach of the trust reposed in them,” to “embezzle and appropriate to their own uses and purposes” the property they hold in trust.

  • Subscribing alumni should review the terms of their agreements with legal counsel to determine whether redirecting their funds within Catholic academia constitutes an actionable breach; then respond accordingly.
    .
    Moreover any other funding of Georgetown including campaign fund raising and establishing scholarships, etc. should either be redirected to a legitimately Catholic institution or placed on hold pending restoration of Catholicism at Georgetown.
    .
    Aggrieved alumni acting in defense of the Faith have options.

  • slainte.

    Great idea.
    Accountability!

  • Pingback: Fr. Barron’s Reflections on New Evangelization - BigPulpit.com
  • Michael Paterson-Seymour: “Likewise, Lord Alverstone CJ said that He was unable “to support a judgment which would deprive the persons, forming a minority, of their rights, simply on the ground that they are unwilling to become members of a body which has not only abandoned the fundamental principles of the Church to which they belong, but supports a principle essentially different from that on which the Church was founded.”
    Substitute “university” for “church” and the reasoning remains equally valid. Those entrusted with money or other assets for a special and limited purpose have no right, “wickedly and feloniously, and in breach of the trust reposed in them,” to “embezzle and appropriate to their own uses and purposes” the property they hold in trust.”
    .
    Endowments to a Catholic University are given to a Catholic University. It is that simple. If you do not adhere to Catholic principles give the money back. It is not yours.

  • “Perhaps the petition has already been placed in the circular file.” Not so. It’s moving higher up.

  • False advertizing, too, might be looked into as a non-profit.org advertizes as a Catholic University, when it is anti-Catholic and a fraud. Not only Georgetown, but Notre Dame, Fordham, and all, teaching everything but Catholicism ought to be forbidden by false advertising laws from swindling prospective customers and corrupting the upcoming generation.

  • I, too, went to a Catholic, Jesuit university that is slowly becoming a state school due to its lack of adherence to Ex Corde Ecclesiae. Several weeks ago, I wrote a letter to the President and the Vice President for Mission about my concerns. I received no response. I certainly don’t have the clout of Mr. Blatty but I plan to do what I can to show my disappointment. No more money, no attending athletic events, and turning in my specialty license plate, a portion of the proceeds of which goes to the university.

    I’m heartbroken that the school I once was so proud of has fallen so far.

  • Heck, even Obama knows when a university, as U of Seattle, is not Catholic and therefore not exempt from his insane mandate.

  • Claire.

    God bless you.
    Keep writing.
    Take this to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. Ask him to help.

    It’s going to take thousands of letters from Catholics like you, and in the end, one by one, the Universities will abide.

    Keep at it, and blessings to you.

  • Thanks Philip. Yes, I plan to keep writing to the powers that be at the school and talking to other alumni. My daughter is also a graduate of the university and she’s as upset as I am. We’re both praying!!