|
Post by beaven302 on Oct 12, 2017 13:13:54 GMT -5
In general, I'm not a huge fan of cartoonish type figures running around at sporting events. They do nothing for me. I would have no problem if they keep the name Crusader and Iggy isn't invited to games anymore. He wasn't there for most of my time going to HC sporting events anyway. However, I don't have five year olds in tow with me and that seems more like Iggy's target audience. I also might be more attached to Iggy if he acted more like Igor (for younger fans, check out DiMarz's avatar) Can you imagine if we still had our student 'Crusader' clad rider atop the white stallion galloping around Fitton Field ?
( and also the student with shovel and bucket....just in case ? )
You have a good memory. If I'm not mistaken, the last time there was a student astride a white horse was the 1963 season. Thereafter, I seem to remember a student in some kind of purple outfit, who carried a fake sword and used a dining-hall tray as a shield. On the subject of other schools mascots, BC used to have two eagles, Maroon and Goldie, who were handled by students who wore jackets with the world "Eagle Trainer" on the back. Finally, back in the 1980s, when I took my children to games, the only mascot that attracted their attention was the Brown bear.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Oct 12, 2017 13:14:13 GMT -5
To answer alum's question, 1.) I have no doubt that if a new nickname for the HC chiefs or indians was being chosen today, it would not be 'crusader'. 2.) The mascot has to go. Putting aside the medieval crusades, the symbolic overlap with the Freemasons is simply too much. * In Hoc Signo Vinces became the motto of Templar Masonry in 1780. The motto is discussed in encyclopedias and dictionaries of American Freemasonry from the mid 1800s. As the Masonic encyclopedias note, In Hoc Signo Vinces was not the medieval motto of the Knights Templar: "Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto thy Name give glory". The Masons freely acknowledge that the origin of the phrase dates from Constantine and the battle of Milvian Bridge (Oct 28, 312). I have no difficulty getting past the motto overlap.. * The crusader symbology used by the athletic department and personified by the mascot is clearly borrowed from imagery of the Knights Templar. The Knights Templar were authorized by Pope Eugene III # to wear the red cross, which became emblematic. The Freemasons resurrected the Knights Templar in the early 18th Century in France, and soon ran afoul of the Church. * From the "Perfect Ceremonies of the Masonic Knights Templar" [in England and Scotland], published 1876 books.google.com/books?id=jA8iAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=When+did+the+Masons+adopt+the+motto+In+Hoc+Signo+Vinces&source=bl&ots=F7zSTVtZ8s&sig=evMoP2zm75CP7UMPdDuR0lz4d_4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwilpdCKvOvWAhXm54MKHTUlCdsQ6AEIQjAE#v=onepage&q=When%20did%20the%20Masons%20adopt%20the%20motto%20In%20Hoc%20Signo%20Vinces&f=false (The Perfect Ceremonies is in error about crusaders adopting the motto,) * Pope Leo XIII wrote the seminal condemnation of Freemasonry. w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18840420_humanum-genus.htmlLeo viewed the Masons as a society intent on destroying [traditional] Christianity. 3. How can the college continue perpetuating the symbology of an organization that is condemned by the Church? ________________________________ Eugene III is one of my favorite Popes. My ancestral family, as Normans, profited greatly from his allowing Henry II to take possession of Ireland for the English crown, --a possession that lasted about 750 years.
|
|
|
Post by hc6774 on Oct 12, 2017 13:17:34 GMT -5
Rickii, I remember the Crusader riding atop a noble steed. Since someone earlier used the "in for a penny, in for a pound," may I suggest that if the Crusader stays, that we go the whole nine yards and bring back a "real" Crusader and gallop around Fitton for football games. Would that attract more fans from Freshmen Field tailgates? I remember Pete Bettinger '65? was the rider... however he wasn't dressed/armed as a medieval knight but more as a Roman centurion...
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Oct 12, 2017 13:23:10 GMT -5
Rickii, I remember the Crusader riding atop a noble steed. Since someone earlier used the "in for a penny, in for a pound," may I suggest that if the Crusader stays, that we go the whole nine yards and bring back a "real" Crusader and gallop around Fitton for football games. Would that attract more fans from Freshmen Field tailgates? I remember Pete Bettinger '65? was the rider... however he wasn't dressed/armed as a medieval knight but more as a Roman centurion... If they were to change the mascot to a centurion, that would tie the college to Constantine, and the cross, and the In Hoc Signo Vinces. And Royal Purple was the color of imperial Rome.
|
|
|
Post by nhteamer on Oct 12, 2017 13:28:46 GMT -5
Is any school mascot "the saracens?"
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Oct 12, 2017 13:52:32 GMT -5
Can you imagine if we still had our student 'Crusader' clad rider atop the white stallion galloping around Fitton Field ?
( and also the student with shovel and bucket....just in case ? )
You have a good memory. If I'm not mistaken, the last time there was a student astride a white horse was the 1963 season. Thereafter, I seem to remember a student in some kind of purple outfit, who carried a fake sword and used a dining-hall tray as a shield. On the subject of other schools mascots, BC used to have two eagles, Maroon and Goldie, who were handled by students who wore jackets with the world "Eagle Trainer" on the back. Finally, back in the 1980s, when I took my children to games, the only mascot that attracted their attention was the Brown bear. I'm not sure of the horse's color but there was a rider with a shield on a horse at some games between 1971 &1974.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Oct 12, 2017 13:56:34 GMT -5
Here's an idea. Several have suggested that we emphasize the positive aspects of the Crusades---only makes sense--to show the positive elements to our Crusader mascot. How about if we set up "The Center for the Study of the Crusades" within the History Department to promote HC as the "go to place" for questions about the Crusades?? Then we could say "Hey, we're experts on the Crusades and, while the Crusades had some glaring negatives, our Crusader embodies all the positive attributes of those campaigns."
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Oct 12, 2017 14:43:30 GMT -5
To answer alum's question, 1.) I have no doubt that if a new nickname for the HC chiefs or indians was being chosen today, it would not be 'crusader'. 2.) The mascot has to go. Putting aside the medieval crusades, the symbolic overlap with the Freemasons is simply too much. * In Hoc Signo Vinces became the motto of Templar Masonry in 1780. The motto is discussed in encyclopedias and dictionaries of American Freemasonry from the mid 1800s. As the Masonic encyclopedias note, In Hoc Signo Vinces was not the medieval motto of the Knights Templar: "Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto thy Name give glory". The Masons freely acknowledge that the origin of the phrase dates from Constantine and the battle of Milvian Bridge (Oct 28, 312). I have no difficulty getting past the motto overlap.. * The crusader symbology used by the athletic department and personified by the mascot is clearly borrowed from imagery of the Knights Templar. The Knights Templar were authorized by Pope Eugene III # to wear the red cross, which became emblematic. The Freemasons resurrected the Knights Templar in the early 18th Century in France, and soon ran afoul of the Church. * From the "Perfect Ceremonies of the Masonic Knights Templar" [in England and Scotland], published 1876 books.google.com/books?id=jA8iAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=When+did+the+Masons+adopt+the+motto+In+Hoc+Signo+Vinces&source=bl&ots=F7zSTVtZ8s&sig=evMoP2zm75CP7UMPdDuR0lz4d_4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwilpdCKvOvWAhXm54MKHTUlCdsQ6AEIQjAE#v=onepage&q=When%20did%20the%20Masons%20adopt%20the%20motto%20In%20Hoc%20Signo%20Vinces&f=false (The Perfect Ceremonies is in error about crusaders adopting the motto,) * Pope Leo XIII wrote the seminal condemnation of Freemasonry. w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18840420_humanum-genus.htmlLeo viewed the Masons as a society intent on destroying [traditional] Christianity. 3. How can the college continue perpetuating the symbology of an organization that is condemned by the Church? ________________________________ Eugene III is one of my favorite Popes. My ancestral family, as Normans, profited greatly from his allowing Henry II to take possession of Ireland for the English crown, --a possession that lasted about 750 years. [ OK, I give. It’s down with the Crusader mascot. How could I have not seen that all the evil they perpetrated in their own name was multiplied by the fact the Masons absorbed theiir garb. I’ll forgive the Moors the atrocities they committed in Spain and France in their jihad against Christianity What about our Jesuits? Are they clean in the Inquisiti? I don’t thinks so. Did not the Jesuits absorb the policy of not allowing others with “blood” problems to not be allowed to become Jesuit priests? Are there other cracks in their veneer like slaveholding in the US? Should we forget the good the Jesuits have done and rid the college of them too?
|
|
|
Post by Chu Chu on Oct 12, 2017 14:58:26 GMT -5
The Panelists: Rev. John F. Baldovin, S.J., ’69, professor of historical and liturgical theology at Boston College; (THERE YA GO. THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST CHOICE FOR THE PANEL) Sahar Bazzaz, associate professor of history; Mark P. Freeman, Distinguished Professor of Ethics and Society, psychology; Kendy M. Hess, associate professor of philosophy; Vickie Langohr, associate professor and chair of political science; and Mathew Schmalz, associate professor of religious studies. Thomas M. Landy, director of the McFarland Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture, moderates the discussion. Professor Bazzaz was a fine professor, as I took one of her classes on the history of the Middle East. She was very powerful in her connection to the subject matter, intelligent, and reasonable. Professor Langohr taught a class on democratic governments in less-frequently-popular/read-about/learned-about countries, and happened to be the last final I ever took before graduation. Without knowing the rest of the panel, and not that my opinion is worth the paper it's not printed on, I think they are fine choices. John Baldovin is my classmate. He is a great guy, a true Crusader, and has remained quite connected to Holy Cross. He said our class mass at our 45th reunion. I have confidence in his thoughtfulness and reasonableness.
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Oct 12, 2017 15:02:27 GMT -5
If we look hard enough, any mascot or saint or hero or historical relic or faces on our money... will each have some flaw at some point. That is the essence of their humanity, or human-related traits. In some cases, overcoming these faults is what makes them worthy of emulation and inspiration. I think that's the best type of hero.
If we really wanted to put this to bed and make sure we picked a perfect mascot or one without any historical blemishes, we should just become the Worcester JESUSES. Except, that would probably be an issue for a few reasons: -The Third Commandment - Jesus is probably going to trigger large swaths of non-Catholic snowflakes, that since we would chose to focus on Him, it would be offensive by default to other religions - Certain businesses and businessmen and women would be offended at the anger Jesus displayed when driving out the money changers from the temple. After all, do we want someone with rage issues and who acted out and assaulted average small business owners to be someone we model our behavior after?
GIVE ME A BREAK.
You were not alive 1000 years ago to be offended by a Crusader, even if they were only savages riding across the continents raping and pillaging. They didn't come burn your house down. No one is protesting that the Minnesota Vikings change their mascots.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 12, 2017 15:14:11 GMT -5
No one is protesting that the Minnesota Vikings change their mascots. Yet
|
|
|
Post by joutsHC77 on Oct 12, 2017 15:33:15 GMT -5
Here's an idea. Several have suggested that we emphasize the positive aspects of the Crusades---only makes sense--to show the positive elements to our Crusader mascot. How about if we set up "The Center for the Study of the Crusades" within the History Department to promote HC as the "go to place" for questions about the Crusades?? Then we could say "Hey, we're experts on the Crusades and, while the Crusades had some glaring negatives, our Crusader embodies all the positive attributes of those campaigns." Second this idea, great idea KY! Increase the academic prominence even more.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Oct 12, 2017 16:08:37 GMT -5
The Dominicans ran the Spanish Inquisition, and the Roman Inquisition, and probably the Portuguese Inquisition. Jesuits were not involved. The Spanish Inquisition carried over to Central America and the Portuguese Inquisition to South America, locations where, as is well known, there were hordes of Muslims and Jews.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Oct 12, 2017 16:43:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 12, 2017 16:46:39 GMT -5
Here's an idea. Several have suggested that we emphasize the positive aspects of the Crusades---only makes sense--to show the positive elements to our Crusader mascot. How about if we set up "The Center for the Study of the Crusades" within the History Department to promote HC as the "go to place" for questions about the Crusades?? Then we could say "Hey, we're experts on the Crusades and, while the Crusades had some glaring negatives, our Crusader embodies all the positive attributes of those campaigns." Second this idea, great idea KY! Increase the academic prominence even more. Much to admire about this idea...but I am not sure how much about the Crusades would strike our modern secular sensibilities as positive. On the campus, here in the US, and abroad. I could see a couple of issues arising out of a perception that we are a center for the study of the Crusades...one being that we become a target for those opposing the Crusades and Christian Crusaders. Of course that would not be a rational response but the discussion regarding issues such as this is not always rational.
|
|
|
Post by hiltonheadcrusader on Oct 12, 2017 17:16:06 GMT -5
I for one would look at this exercise from a less fatalistic point of view if a Ron Perry Sr. or other dignified “Crusader” was participating. I have zero faith in those orchestrating this sham.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Oct 12, 2017 17:55:19 GMT -5
The attempts of the Church to grab the treasure of the Templars and to erase their debts to the Order are documented in history. On this matter I am afraid that I have more problems with our Church than with the Templars. The torture and death of so many of these men (and their family members) was not a high point in Church history.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Oct 12, 2017 20:46:27 GMT -5
"If, as a number of us have suggested, the Board decides to keep the name Crusader but ditch the guy in the knight suit, would this cause anyone to stop donating, return the mail, get really mad, etc.?" ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I guess we could keep the name Crusaders (which may or may not still offend some people) as in The Holy Cross Crusaders Basketball Team offset by a small beagle as a mascot to bring to the games. Maybe even a thoroughly nonthreatening beagle puppy. Without teeth if possible. Sort of like Handsome Dan but much much cuter.
Not sure that would satisfy everyone (especially the easily offended and grouchy cat lovers) and personally I am content with the status quo myself. But who doesn't love a cuddly little dog? .I have a basset hound who would love to audition for the job.
|
|
|
Post by deep Purple on Oct 12, 2017 21:02:10 GMT -5
I can remember when people weren't concerned or offended by cartoons, nicknames and mascots, etc. FYI - The Minnesota Vikings are not real Vikings. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are not real buccaneers. These things were never meant to be taken seriously. I wasn't aware of this until recently but it looks like the Hofstra Flying Dutchmen are now the Hofstra Pride. Some people have too much time on their hands and/or need to get a life.
|
|
|
Post by jkh67 on Oct 12, 2017 21:29:26 GMT -5
I can remember when people weren't concerned or offended by cartoons, nicknames and mascots, etc. FYI - The Minnesota Vikings are not real Vikings. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are not real buccaneers. These things were never meant to be taken seriously. I wasn't aware of this until recently but it looks like the Hofstra Flying Dutchmen are now the Hofstra Pride. Some people have too much time on their hands and/or need to get a life. Amen! It might be one thing if Muslim groups were protesting the Crusader moniker. The fact that the College has not mentioned any such protesters leads me to believe that there are none such. If that's the case, this is nothing more than an absurd exercise in internal navel gazing designed to assuage some unknown assumed guilt for I know not what. Absurdity to the nth degree.
|
|
|
Post by jkh67 on Oct 12, 2017 21:39:44 GMT -5
I can remember when people weren't concerned or offended by cartoons, nicknames and mascots, etc. FYI - The Minnesota Vikings are not real Vikings. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are not real buccaneers. These things were never meant to be taken seriously. I wasn't aware of this until recently but it looks like the Hofstra Flying Dutchmen are now the Hofstra Pride. Some people have too much time on their hands and/or need to get a life. Amen! It might be one thing if Muslim groups were protesting the Crusader moniker. The fact that the College has not mentioned any such protesters leads me to believe that there are none such. If that's the case, this is nothing more than an absurd exercise in internal navel gazing designed to assuage some unknown assumed guilt for I know not what. Absurdity to the nth degree. And why is "Holy Cross" any less offensive than "Crusader"? The two are intimately connected, are they not? Not to mention that the Jesuits are hardly without sin when it comes to harrying those not subscribing to the Company line. (Speaking of les bons peres jesuites, I won't even get into the Reverend Mulledy's abominable behavior.) Wipe the slate clean, I say. Toss them all out. No more "in hoc signo vinces" for us. We are now the Worcester College Purple. Our motto: "If we're offending anyone, let us know and we'll make amends." What a crock of BS!
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Oct 13, 2017 5:30:09 GMT -5
If you watched the video, while you will not see him, you will hear Frank Vellaccio bring up the point that I have repeatedly brought up and you have too - if a "Crusader" is offensive, then a Cross/crucifix will offend those same people and the name "Holy Cross" will be offensive. The academics on the panel did not buy this domino theory (Vietnam allusion, anyone? - speaking of which, for another thread, Ken Burns' "Vietnam" is an outstanding piece of work). Almost all of them were too young to have been alive/old enough to have experienced Vietnam in any meaningful way except our '69 Jesuit alum at BC.
In the video, it did not sound like most of the students were for changing the mascot. On the faculty panel, it seemed that the two ladies on the ends were the ones pushing for the review and, IIRC, neither is a Catholic. As I have posted in the past, the school poll showing something like 86% in favor of keeping the Crusader name for the student newspaper would seem to suggest that there is not a groundswell of support for a change in mascot, even among non-Catholics.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 13, 2017 6:27:59 GMT -5
I can remember when people weren't concerned or offended by cartoons, nicknames and mascots, etc. FYI - The Minnesota Vikings are not real Vikings. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are not real buccaneers. These things were never meant to be taken seriously. I wasn't aware of this until recently but it looks like the Hofstra Flying Dutchmen are now the Hofstra Pride. Some people have too much time on their hands and/or need to get a life. Amen! It might be one thing if Muslim groups were protesting the Crusader moniker. The fact that the College has not mentioned any such protesters leads me to believe that there are none such. If that's the case, this is nothing more than an absurd exercise in internal navel gazing designed to assuage some unknown assumed guilt for I know not what. Absurdity to the nth degree. Agreed. The thoroughly nonexistent protests against the Crusader image or Crusader actions (900!) years ago combined with the faux academic 'othering" theory does not equal a mandate for either conversation or change. The alt-right conflations, illusions and allusions voiced by two panelists were actually laughable. Just watching a few minutes of the discussion reminds me why professors are either ridiculed or ignored in non-academic circles.
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 13, 2017 6:43:54 GMT -5
Well I do admit that conference had the feel of a senior seminar, one to which I would have made periodic appearances and dropped off a paper at the end. The only difference is that at the end of this academic tango it won’t just be a bunch of papers and grades on a transcript. Real change might happen.
Again, show me the vocal contingent other than the biology teacher who was so appalled by the name Crusader that he almost didn’t take the job at HC. I’m not convinced the professors bookending the panel are not open to reason. I simply think they are behaving like good humanities professors who are, by definition, bound to an open-mindedness and intellectual consideration of such topics. Don’t expect non-theologians to instinctively fall back in defense of The Crusader. Not in 2017 anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Oct 13, 2017 7:11:22 GMT -5
For a Jewish view of the Crusades. www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2617029/jewish/The-Bloody-Crusades.htmThere are several factual errors in the narrative presented, but the larger conclusion is one that should be addressed: the persecution of the Jews that began with the First Crusade culminated in the Holocaust. That is the belief of the world's largest Jewish organization. The source is Chabad Lubavich, who are Orthodox; Jared and Ivanka are members. Anyone care to offer a rebuttal?
|
|