It’s time for some good news, and I consider this very good news. As of today, there are 20 abortion clinics open in the entire state of Texas, down from 44 nearly three years ago, and it is estimated that by September that number will be reduced to six. SIX. Now, while that is still six too many, in a state the size of Texas that is cause for some modest celebration. Coming on the heels of Wendy Davis’s relatively pathetic performance in Tuesday’s primary in which she managed to attract fewer voters than the previous guy who lost the general election to Rick Perry, and the fact that early polls show that Davis is cruising to a crushing defeat in November, it is clear that voters in the state are very happy with the law that has helped shut down these
murder abortion clinics.
The National Journal article is worth a read for a couple of reasons. First of all, the clear undercurrent of lament in the author’s tone is palpable (“leaving low-income women in rural Texas without nearby access to abortion”). More importantly, it emphasizes the vital role that culture plays with regards to abortion. While we can never discount the role of laws and regulations within the abortion debate, especially since it was the enactment of a law that helped drive these numbers down, the social stigma in the state against abortion also has played a critical role.
Neither clinic has an [ambulatory surgical center] and Hagstrom Miller says she doesn’t have the budget or patients to build a multimillion-dollar center. The Beaumont clinic does currently have a physician that has hospital admitting privileges, but he is 75 years old and trying to retire. Attempting to get hospital admitting privileges has proven a fruitless process; the stigma against abortion is too great in Texas, and Hagstrom Miller has not been able to get responses from any doctors or hospitals, despite calling them all.
“I have trouble getting a vendor for bottled water,” she says.
As though I needed another excuse to love the state of Texas.
PopeWatch is old enough to recall when Democrat politicians would not cite a pope prior to betraying Catholic moral teaching. Father Z gives us the details:
We have seen antinomianism rear its dangerous head in many scenarios now: those who are bound to uphold and enforce the law simply deciding sua sponte that they won’t uphold law X or Y because the law conflicts with a pet position.
But this is downright disgusting. From TIME:
Kentucky’s Attorney General Explains Why He Won’t Defend Gay Marriage Ban
Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway tells TIME [A willing accomplice in this Act of Dumb.] why he decided not to defend his state’s ban on same-sex marriages, saying he ‘knows where history is going on this’ despite the complications the decision could have for his potential gubernatorial bid [And you don't want to be "on the wrong side of history", do you! - [POUNDING HEAD ON DESK] – ]
Calling laws against same-sex marriage the last vestige of widespread discrimination in America, [Last vestigate? HA! It is to laugh. Will he crusade next against anti-Catholicism? You would think that a man in this position would be smart enough to distinguish this special interest group's agitprop from the legitimate claims of black people in the civil rights movement.] Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway told TIME Tuesday he refused to continue defending his state’s ban on gay marriage because he feared he’d regret it for the rest of his life. “I know where history is going on this,” he said. “I know what was in my heart.” [Ahhh! It's "in his heart". Well, then, I guess it's okay then.]
“Where we are as a country now, this really seems to be the only minority group that a significant portion of our society thinks it’s still okay to discriminate against.” [So long as you exclude the Little Sisters of the Poor and, I dunno, tens of thousands of others who object to the HHS mandate.]
A Catholic and a Democrat [What a surprise.] considering running for governor in 2015, Conway said he knew the decision could put him at odds with voters and with church leaders in his hometown. [Get this....] His thinking was shaped partly by statements from Pope Francis that encouraged openness toward gays. “Our new pope recently said on an airplane ‘Who am I to judge.’ The new pope has said a lot of things that Catholics like me really like. I have, as someone who grew up as a Catholic listened to some of the words of the new pope and found them inspirational.” [This quote again. Gosh, thanks, Holy Father, for that one. That said, its use here is a LIE. HERE]
We have lurched more deeply into the Age of Stoopid, I”m afraid.
The Left’s education system in these USA, which infected Catholic schools as well, has left at least one whole generation without the tools to think, or the basic catechism points that allow Catholics to figure out nearly instantly that some MSM reportage doesn’t pass the smell test Continue reading
The above video is from the Alabama Right to Life website.
In a vain attempt to stop the passage of pro-life legislation in Alabama, Democrat Representative Alvin Holmes, a truly charming individual who earlier this year referred to Justice Clarence Thomas as an Uncle Tom, drew the race card, the first resort of pro-aborts and the Democrat party:
“If you asked the people in here now to raise their hands, of those who are against abortion, 99% of all of the white people in here gonna raise their hand that they are against abortion,” Holmes said Tuesday according to a recording of some of the debate on al.com. “On the other hand, 99% of the whites that are sitting in here now, if they daughter got pregnant by a black man, they gonna make their daughter have an abortion. They ain’t gonna let her have the baby. You know, the truth sometimes hurts … They’re not gonna let that happen. You know that and I know that. You will never admit it.”
During his speech, Holmes asks one white woman, it’s unclear who, if she’d allow her daughter to have a mixed-race baby.
“Yes, I would,” the woman replies.
“Well, I need to commend you then,” Holmes says. “There’s not one in 100,000 that would do that.”
Go here to read the rest. Of course abortion is the dream come true for the Klan, the traditional terrorist wing of the Democrat party in the South. In adjacent Mississippi, for example, we have these statistics:
Based on data published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 39,052 black babies were killed by abortions in Mississippi between 1995 and 2010. During that same time period, 14,529 white babies were aborted in the Magnolia State.
The total number of abortions between 1995 and 2010 in Mississippi was 54,484. In addition to blacks and whites, that number also includes abortions among Hispanics, “Other” (meaning Asian and Native American), and “Unknown,” as published by the CDC.
Whites in Mississippi outnumber blacks by a ratio of 1.6-to-1. Despite that difference, the data show that black abortions comprised, on average, 72% of the total over the last 16 years. Continue reading
A blogger named Dennis Sanders has written about the recent controversy in Arizona from the perspective of a gay man (“married” and “a man of the cloth”, he says). There are two main ideas in his piece, one that is the centerpiece and another that is peripheral but also important. The centerpiece is that “marriage equality” advocates (I will call them same-sex marriage, or SSM advocates) ought to recognize that the refusal of orthodox Christians to participate in gay weddings is not necessarily or even often attributable to hatred and bigotry. Though SSM advocates may not understand or condone the religious and philosophical arguments we put forward, it would be better for society if people on both sides could stop assuming the absolute worst of one another. The peripheral argument is that this proposed change of tone and behavior on the part of gay marriage activists is necessary if they are to be gracious winners in the culture war. It is Sanders’ belief, shared by many on his side of the argument, that they have won this war even if we on the other side have not surrendered yet. His language is civil and conciliatory, though one still cannot help but feel that the main point here is “let the babies have their bottles.”
As far as the first argument goes, I am all for it. Though I am sure that Mr. Sanders would be deeply offended or perhaps just annoyed at my refusal to recognize his relationship with another man as a marriage, I have always been a proponent of true and authentic tolerance. Sanders quotes another writer on tolerance, and both he and this writer agree with me: tolerance is only possible in relation to something or someone we dislike. I dislike the “marriage equality” movement immensely, not simply because of some passages from the Bible, but because of its concentrated philosophical and political attack on the natural law foundations of Western civilization. Its incessant self-comparison to black civil rights struggles is as fallacious as it is nauseating; its core assumptions, taken to their fullest implications, are anarchistic and nihilistic. It is precisely because the vast majority of ordinary people rarely take their stated beliefs to their logical conclusions that I am able and willing to tolerate most of those beliefs. I believe we can have a pluralistic society, governed by the 10th amendment of the US Constitution, in which different people in different polities can establish different laws and customs by which they live. Furthermore, they can and should peacefully co-exist within the same American nation. Such was, I believe, the vision of our founding fathers.
Well, PopeWatch guesses things were just too quiet. The Pope has given yet another interview:
“Matrimony is between a man and a woman,” the pope said, but moves to “regulate diverse situations of cohabitation (are) driven by the need to regulate economic aspects among persons, as for instance to assure medical care.” Asked to what extent the church could understand this trend, he replied: “It is necessary to look at the diverse cases and evaluate them in their variety.”
Bishops around the world have differed in their responses to civil recognition of nonmarital unions. The president of the Pontifical Council for the Family said in February 2013 that some legal arrangements are justifiable to protect the inheritance rights of nonmarried couples. But until now, no pope has indicated even tentative acceptance of civil unions.
In the interview, Pope Francis praised Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical “Humanae Vitae,” which prohibited the use of contraception.
In contradicting contemporary pressures for population control, Pope Paul’s “genius was prophetic, he had the courage to side against the majority, defend moral discipline, put a brake on the culture, oppose neo-Malthusianism, present and future,” Pope Francis said.
But he also noted that Pope Paul had instructed confessors to interpret his encyclical with “much mercy, attention to concrete situations.”
“The question is not whether to change the doctrine, but to go deeper and make sure that pastoral care takes account of situations and of what each person is able to do,” Pope Francis said.
The pope said birth control, like the predicament of divorced and civilly remarried Catholics, would be a topic of discussion at the Vatican in October at an extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the family. He said the synod would approach all such problems “in the light of profound reflection,” rather than casuistry, which he described as a superficial, pharisaical theology focused exclusively on particular cases.
The pope said he had welcomed the “intense discussion” at a February gathering of cardinals, where German Cardinal Walter Kasper gave a talk suggesting divorced and civilly remarried Catholics might sometimes be allowed to receive Communion even without an annulment of their first, sacramental marriages.
“Fraternal and open confrontations foster the growth of theological and pastoral thought,” he said. “I’m not afraid of this; on the contrary, I seek it.”
Asked if the church’s teachings on sexual and medical ethics represented “non-negotiable values,” a formulation used by Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Francis said he had “never understood the expression ‘non-negotiable values.’”
“Values are values, period,” he said. “I cannot say that, among the fingers of a hand, there is one less useful than another. That is why I cannot understand in what sense there could be negotiable values.” Continue reading
I have reported what I saw and heard, but only part of it. For most of it, I have no words.
Edward R. Murrow at Buchenwald, April 15, 1945
1944 was seventy years ago, and on this blog we will have numerous posts depicting the battles fought in the wake of D-Day up through the fall of the Third Reich. As we recall this, I think it is also important to recall the type of tyranny that the Third Reich was, and why it was necessary to utterly vanquish it at a hideous cost in human lives.
When Buchenwald death camp was liberated, General Patton was so outraged that he ordered military police to go to Weimar, the nearest town, and bring 1000 German civilians back to tour the camp to see what their leaders had done. The MPs were just as outraged, and brought back 2000. Edward R. Murrow did a radio broadcast from Buchenwald on April 15, 1945 that is absolutely unforgettable. Evil can grow so strong in this world that it has to be stopped, no matter the cost. Here is the transcript of Murrow’s broadcast:
Permit me to tell you what you would have seen and heard had you had been with me on Thursday. It will not be pleasant listening. If you are at lunch, or if you have no appetite to hear what Germans have done, now is a good time to switch off the radio for I propose to tell you of Buchenwald. It is on a small hill about four miles outside Weimar, and it was one of the largest concentration camps in Germany, and it was built to last. Continue reading
One of my favorite expressions, that I think I inherited from my sainted mother, is, Fill in the blank, doesn’t have the sense that God gave a goose. Here is the latest incident that elicited that phrase from me:
A Minnesota public high school was so committed to obeying its fire drill policy to the exact letter of the law that it forced a female student–dressed only in a swimsuit, and sopping wet–to stand outside in the freezing cold for ten minutes. As a result, she suffered frostbite.
The trouble began when a small science experiment triggered the fire alarm at Como Park Senior High School in St. Paul, Minnesota. Fourteen-year-old Kayona Hagen-Tietz was swimming in the school pool for health class at the time. Her clothes were in her locker, and a teacher told her that there was no time for her to change. Hagen-Tietz was rushed outside–still wet and dressed in only (a) swimsuit.
Hagen-Tietz asked to wait inside an employee’s car, or at the elementary school across the street. But administrators believed that this would violate official policy, and could get the school in trouble, so they opted to simply let the girl freeze.
“Educational itineraries of encounter and of dialogue”: The new mission of Catholic higher education…
Many have said that Pope Francis would “shake things up.” They have pointed to his living quarters, cars, committee of cardinals to study reforming the Curia, founding the new dicastery for finance, and most famously, his “Who am I to judge?” statement. These provide all the testimony need to demonstrate that this Pope is indeed shaking things up.
There’s now more evidence.
At the recent Plenary Assembly of the Congregation for Catholic Education, members discussed a series of issues:
- the reform of the Apostolic Constitution, Sapientia Christiana, which governs the Pontifical university system (Catholic universities chartered by the Vatican, not Catholic universities and colleges chartered by other nations or states);
- the recovery and strengthening of Catholic identity in all Catholic institutions of higher learning; and,
- the preparation of two major anniversaries: the 50th anniversary of the II Vatican Council’s declaration, Gravissimum educationis, which called for a renewal of Catholic instruction and formation at all levels and the 25th anniversary of the promulgation of the Apostolic Constitution, Ex corde Ecclesiae, which describes the nature and mission of Catholic universities.
Ho hum. More pious platitudes about providing an “integral formation” and strengthening Catholic identity.
Who’s interested in that? Certainly not many of those who administer and teach in the nation’s Catholic universities and colleges. They routinely interpret Vatican statements concerning Catholic education to fit their progressive secularist agenda or ignore those statements altogether.
However, those weren’t the topics on Pope Francis’ agenda when he addressed the Plenary Assembly. Of many things the Pope told participants, he expressed his desire that they
…be involved in educational itineraries of encounter and of dialogue, with a courageous and innovative faithfulness that is capable of bringing the different “souls” of a multicultural society together with Catholic identity.
What’s this? “Itineraries of encounter and dialogue”? A “courageous and innovative faithfulness”? “Bringing different ‘souls’ of a multicultural society together with a Catholic identity”?
It’s difficult to know what Pope Francis means, as the terms he used could mean many different things to many different people and be invoked to quite different ends.
Take the phrase “courageous and innovative faithfulness,” for example.
Liberal Catholics could interpret it to justify continuing their experiments in Catholic thought and practice that undermine Catholic doctrine. It takes courage and innovation to move beyond the confines and limitations of doctrine, they would argue. Consider, for example, their research and calls for change in Church teaching about so many moral issues–including divorce and remarriage, so-called “homosexual marriage,” and women’s ordination–and being rebuffed at the highest levels of the Vatican, especially the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Just ask Father Charles Curran.
Conservative Catholics could interpret that phrase to justify a greater emphasis upon doctrine in Theology courses as well as reining in many of the so-called “progressive” trends in U.S. Catholic higher education during the past five decades. It takes courage and innovation stem the tide of secular progressivism that has diminished Catholic identity in those institutions, they would argue. Consider, for example, the national culture of Catholic higher education as well as many of those institutions where conservatives are marginalized, if not mocked for their fidelity to Church teaching. Just ask the folks at Wyoming Catholic College or conservatives at institutions like the University of Notre Dame, Georgetown, DePaul, Gonzaga, and the University of San Francisco, among others.
Is it possible that the Holy Father thinks both are forms of courage and innovative faithfulness?
The Motley Monk thinks not.
In this instance, however, the Pope’s choice of terms has muddied the waters more than they have been for the past five decades. In doing so, the Holy Father may have unintentionally emboldened the secular progressivists in U.S. Catholic higher education. Now, their lemmings over at National Catholic Reporter will endeavor to convince more and more folks that they are the authentic interpreters of Pope Francis’ statements concerning Catholic higher education.
To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:
The Lenten message of Pope Francis:
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
As Lent draws near, I would like to offer some helpful thoughts on our path of conversion as individuals and as a community. These insights are inspired by the words of Saint Paul: ‘For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich’. The Apostle was writing to the Christians of Corinth to encourage them to be generous in helping the faithful in Jerusalem who were in need. What do these words of Saint Paul mean for us Christians today? What does this invitation to poverty, a life of evangelical poverty, mean to us today?
First of all, it shows us how God works. He does not reveal himself cloaked in worldly power and wealth but rather in weakness and poverty: ‘though He was rich, yet for your sake he became poor …’. Christ, the eternal Son of God, one with the Father in power and glory, chose to be poor; he came amongst us and drew near to each of us; he set aside his glory and emptied himself so that he could be like us in all things. God’s becoming man is a great mystery! But the reason for all this is his love, a love which is grace, generosity, a desire to draw near, a love which does not hesitate to offer itself in sacrifice for the beloved. Charity, love, is sharing with the one we love in all things. Love makes us similar, it creates equality, it breaks down walls and eliminates distances. God did this with us. Indeed, Jesus ‘worked with human hands, thought with a human mind, acted by human choice and loved with a human heart. Born of the Virgin Mary, he truly became one of us, like us in all things except sin’.
By making himself poor, Jesus did not seek poverty for its own sake but, as Saint Paul says ‘that by his poverty you might become rich’. This is no mere play on words or a catch phrase. Rather, it sums up God’s logic, the logic of love, the logic of the incarnation and the cross. God did not let our salvation drop down from heaven, like someone who gives alms from their abundance out of a sense of altruism and piety. Christ’s love is different! When Jesus stepped into the waters of the Jordan and was baptised by John the Baptist, he did so not because he was in need of repentance, or conversion; he did it to be among people who need forgiveness, among us sinners, and to take upon himself the burden of our sins. In this way he chose to comfort us, to save us, to free us from our misery. It is striking that the Apostle states that we were set free, not by Christ’s riches but by his poverty. Yet Saint Paul is well aware of the ‘the unsearchable riches of Christ’, that he is ‘heir of all things’.
So what is this poverty by which Christ frees us and enriches us? It is his way of loving us, his way of being our neighbour, just as the Good Samaritan was neighbour to the man left half dead by the side of the road. What gives us true freedom, true salvation and true happiness is the compassion, tenderness and solidarity of his love. Christ’s poverty which enriches us is his taking flesh and bearing our weaknesses and sins as an expression of God’s infinite mercy to us. Christ’s poverty is the greatest treasure of all: Jesus wealth is that of his boundless confidence in God the Father, his constant trust, his desire always and only to do the Father’s will and give glory to him. Jesus is rich in the same way as a child who feels loved and who loves its parents, without doubting their love and tenderness for an instant. Jesus’ wealth lies in his being the Son; his unique relationship with the Father is the sovereign prerogative of this Messiah who is poor. When Jesus asks us to take up his ‘yoke which is easy’, he asks us to be enriched by his ‘poverty which is rich’ and his ‘richness which is poor’, to share his filial and fraternal Spirit, to become sons and daughters in the Son, brothers and sisters in the first-born brother.
It has been said that the only real regret lies in not being a saint (L. Bloy); we could also say that there is only one real kind of poverty: not living as children of God and brothers and sisters of Christ. Continue reading
My late son Larry always seemed to enjoy Ash Wednesday. Last year I went up with him to receive ashes. He heard the traditional admonition: “Remember man thou art dust, and to dust thou shalt return.” and had the ashes placed on his forehead. He then did the normal circle turn that he did after receiving Communion, and we went back to our pew.
Little did we know that this would be Larry’s last Ash Wednesday. He died in the wee hours of Pentecost last year of a seizure. (On that dreadful date I said to my wife that one of the greatest gifts God has given us in this life is our inability to see the future.) Now Larry’s physical body is well on its way back to dust, awaiting the Resurrection when it will be reunited with his soul.
Larry is now in the land which knows not Ash Wednesday, but only Eternal Easter, and we are left to experience an Ash Wednesday without him. I have always found Ash Wednesday to be a bleak day and it will be much bleaker yet without my son. However, Ash Wednesday, like death, is not the end, but merely a beginning. As Ash Wednesday is the portal to Easter, death is the portal to eternal life. Continue reading
Alan Grayson is a Democrat Congressman from Florida. He has a well earned reputation for being bellicose and very loosely wired. Apparently this persona is not just for public consumption, as Allahpundit at Hot Air explains:
A perfect opportunity to reprint one of my favorite quotes ever. From a Politico story titled “Alan Grayson goes too far for colleagues” published October 26, 2009:
“Is this news to you that this guy’s one fry short of a Happy Meal?” asked Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.)
Anthony Weiner would never steer you wrong, you know.
According to the petition, Lolita Grayson was preparing to take the couple’s two youngest children to a play date when Alan Grayson “showed up, unannounced,” and asked to speak to her inside.
After she refused, retrieved his mail and asked him to leave, Alan Grayson “then deliberately and with force pushed [Lolita Grayson] very hard against the front door, causing [her] to fall to the ground as a result,” the petition states.
She told her husband not to touch her, then pushed him in the face and kneed him in the stomach “in order to protect and defend herself,” before calling 911, her petition says.
As she was talking to the operator, Alan Grayson told his wife, in the presence of their children, that she “would receive nothing” in their divorce and would be left “in the gutter,” the petition states.
Her complaint claims that he’s battered her and their kids “from time to time” in the past and that she fears for her safety. Grayson denies all of it, calling the accusations “frivolous” and his wife’s behavior “erratic.”
A guy as even-tempered and progressive as Grayson is surely innocent of these terrible charges, which probably explains why there’ll be 1/100th as much press interest in this story as there would be if a Republican with a similarly high media profile were accused of the same thing. That must also be why, per Guy Benson, the Sentinel doesn’t mention his party affiliation until the 23rd paragraph of a 25-paragraph story. Continue reading
Well, one clear aspect of the pontificate of Pope Francis is that groups associated with the traditional latin mass had better watch their six. Father Z gives us the latest details:
The source of these reports seems to be the blog Rorate Caeli, which provides a copy of the letter that Bp. Olson sent to Mr. Michael King, who is the President of Fisher More College.
Here is the letter, which I found at the aforementioned blog:
None of us are privy to the conversation, mentioned by the bishop in his letter, that took place on 24 February. I have no idea what the tone of that conversation was or how many conversations took place.
However, I am appalled at the tone of the Bp. Olson’s letter to Mr. King. Frankly, it reminds me of a note an authoritarian seminary rector would pin on the mailroom bulletin board about student attire or lights-out time, rather then gentle pastoral solicitude of a diocesan bishop in the era of Pope Francis. I am shocked at the suggestion that this decision is taken for the sake of the souls of the students and the president himself, as if the Extraordinary Form were somehow spiritually harmful.
That said, what we don’t know about this situation could fill volumes.
For example, I discern in the bishop’s second point, the one about his granting faculties, the possibility that the priest who had been saying Mass at Fisher More on a regular basis may not have had any faculties at all, from any bishop or religious superior. I suspect that there is more to that poorly phrased second point than meets the eye.
Also, while some Catholic college and university chaplaincies also have the canonical designation as a parish (e.g., St. Paul’s at the University of Madison), Summorum Pontificum doesn’t seem to apply as clearly. The Motu Proprio doesn’t seem to apply to college chapels and chapels on military bases. That said, the spirit of both Summorum Pontificum and Universae Ecclesiae communicate something far different from the tone, at least, of the bishop’s letter.
Again, what we don’t know about this situation could fill volumes. I, at least, don’t know who the priests were who were saying that Mass for the students at Fisher More. Were they of the SSPX or some independent group? Were they preaching things that were improper (e.g., attacking Pope Francis from the pulpit, directly attacking the Novus Ordo as invalid)?
More will come out, and soon.
In the meantime, it is hard to imagine why a letter with such a menacing tone would be sent to a layman about something which soon-to-be St. John Paul II described as a “legitimate aspiration”. You will recall that Bl. John Paul asked, nay rather, required by his apostolic authority, that respect be shown to those who desire the traditional forms of the Roman Rite (cf. Ecclesia Dei adflicta, 6c).
My first hope and prayer, and petition to the Guardian Angels of those involved, is for cool heads and a positive resolution to this conflict so that the students and staff of Fisher More will be able to have their legitimate aspirations respected according to the will of St. John Paul and Benedict XVI.
The Moderation Queue is ON.
A priest friend forwarded information from HIS priest friend in Dallas. Thus, I will edit a great deal and use bullet points. These things either happened or they didn’t and can be verified one way or another:
- In May a prof of FMC (Fisher More College) gave a talk and denied aspects of Vatican II
- The FSSP priests withdrew their services at FMC some time ago.
- Taylor Marshall, married with several children, resigned his job at FMC without another job.
- At Thanksgiving, 2013, Fr. Nicholas Gruner, the suspended Fatima Priest, said Mass at FMC.
- These things took place when the Diocese of Fort Worth was vacant.
- “This is NOT about hatred for the TLM.”
All of these points (except the last, which was an opinion) suggest dysfunction which the new bishop needed to address.
It may indeed be that this is not about “hatred for the TLM”. If that is the case, then Bp. Olson will surely want to make that clear in some way.
One commentator, below, observed that the bishop said that students could go to a parish, off-campus, where the TLM is offered, thus suggesting that he doesn’t have a problem with the TLM itself.
I hope that is the case. The tone of the bishop’s letter certainly fueled that suspicion. Getting some of the details out will help diffuse some of this tension about an “attack by a bishop on the TLM”. It may not be that at all, though I still scratch my head about this. Continue reading
Say not the struggle naught availeth,
The labour and the wounds are vain,
The enemy faints not, nor faileth,
And as things have been they remain.
If hopes were dupes, fears may be liars;
It may be, in yon smoke conceal’d,
Your comrades chase e’en now the fliers,
And, but for you, possess the field.
For while the tired waves, vainly breaking,
Seem here no painful inch to gain,
Far back, through creeks and inlets making,
Comes silent, flooding in, the main.
And not by eastern windows only,
When daylight comes, comes in the light;
In front the sun climbs slow, how slowly!
But westward, look, the land is bright!
One of my favorite poems, it was quoted by Winston Churchill on the floor of Parliament when Britain stood alone against the Third Reich: Continue reading
Lenin wannabe Bill de Blasio, Mayor of New York City, has kept a promise to the teacher unions to go after charter schools:
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio took off the gloves in his battle with education reformers, rescinding an agreement for the city to share space with several public charter schools.
The move undercuts educators, parents and some 700 students at four schools, including Harlem Success 4, one of the public charter school movement’s top success stories, and two set to open in the fall. While agreements at those schools were rescinded, expansion of a fourth school was also blocked. The schools were to operate rent-free in city-owned facilities under deals backed by former Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an ardent supporter of charter schools.
On February 27, 2014 the Pope met with the Congregation for Bishops. The Pope discussed the type of Bishops he is looking for:
“Since faith comes from proclamation we need kerygmatic bishops. … Men who are guardians of doctrine, not so as as to measure how far the world is from doctrinal truth, but in order to fascinate the world … with the beauty of love, with the freedom offered by the Gospel. The Church does not need apologists for her causes or crusaders for her battles, but humble and trusting sowers of the truth, who know that it is always given to them anew and trust in its power. Men who are patient men as they know that the weeds will never fill the field”. Continue reading