|
Post by td128 on Apr 3, 2018 11:50:05 GMT -5
Transparency is the great and ultimately only disinfectant.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Apr 3, 2018 11:31:07 GMT -5
Also of interest, I have heard from more than a small number of alumni who have informed me that they are not sharing news of this situation with their elderly parents (especially their fathers who graduated from the Cross in the '40s and '50s and early '60s) as they believe it would cause untold stress.
Many of these folks have been longstanding major donors to the college.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Apr 3, 2018 11:17:23 GMT -5
td128, interesting that you included the link to the Fenwick Review article now. Which you could have done originally rather than post the Breitbart link (that included the FR link) and perhaps reduced or eliminated some of the very negative Holy Cross stories that followed Lou, I understand your point and for that very reason posted a link to the Fenwick Review a mere 20 minutes after initiating this thread with the link to Breitbart. I think I was in a semi-state of shock at the time. In any event and in typical fashion, all too often those who do not like or appreciate the fallout and impact of a message seem to attack the messenger/outlet in a knee jerk fashion so as to distract attention from the real crux of the matter. I fully concur with the release put out by Bishop McManus.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Apr 3, 2018 10:35:23 GMT -5
Just so we do not lose sight of some of the material upon which this debate rests, I welcome sharing it and recommend readers put it on a low simmer and stir periodically: Professor Liew’s understanding of Jesus in “Queering Desires” suggests an unusual interpretation of the Holy Trinity:
Suffice it to say that not only does this exchange of desires place the Father’s identity in question but also that the Father-Son dyad in John is always already interrupted by and dependent on the participation of a third party. One may, as a result, turn around Jesus’ well-known statement in John, “No one comes to the Father except through me” (14:6c): Jesus himself needs others to cum with the Father. Jesus’ statement that “I in them [his followers] and you [the Father] in me” turns out to be quite a description.
What we find in John is a Jesus who longs to be “had” by the Father…Things do not get less queer as one gets to the other parts of John’s Gospel. It is noticeable that throughout the Gospel Jesus and his Father form a “mutual glorification society” (5:41; 8:50, 54; 12:28– 29; 13:32; 17:1, 4– 5). This constant elevation or stroking is nothing less than an exciting of the penis, or better yet, phallus. Its consistency is then explainable, since “we all know that after … an orgasmic dissemination or circulation, the phallus, like most penises, becomes limp” (Sifuentes-Jáuregui 2002, 159). Fast forwarding to the passion narratives, Conway observes that John’s Jesus is a “quintessential man” because he “reveals no weakening to the passions that might undercut his manly deportment” (2003a, 175). If this is so, there is also something quintessentially queer here.
During the passion, Jesus is not only beaten (18:22– 23; 19:3) and flogged (19:1); his body is also nailed and his side pierced (19:18, 23a, 34, 37; 20:24– 28). Oddly, John defines Jesus’ masculinity with a body that is being opened to penetration. 24 Even more oddly, Jesus’ ability to face his “hour” is repeatedly associated with his acknowledging of and communing with his Father (12:27– 28; 14:12, 28; 16:10, 17, 28; 17:1– 25; 18:11), who is, as Jesus explicitly states, “with me” (16:32) throughout this process, which Jesus also describes as one of giving birth (16:21– 22).
What I am suggesting is that, when Jesus’ body is being penetrated, his thoughts are on his Father. He is, in other words, imagining his passion experience as a (masochistic?) sexual relation with his own Father.11
From The Fenwick Review: thefenwickreview.holycross.edu/archives/newtheologyIs this really acceptable published research as to how Fr. Boroughs wants to 'brand' our college and that will subsequently impact the definition of his legacy?
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 31, 2018 12:03:35 GMT -5
Alum, with all due respect, I think you are missing the forest while focusing on a few selected small trees. None of what you touch upon has anything to do with allowing the publication of perverted blasphemy under the cloak of academic freedom.
Constructive, engaged, respectful debate of the issues of the day including teachings that may run counter to those held by the Catholic Church? All for it.
Publication of vile, perverted blasphemy that mocks and ridicules our Lord and Savior? No bid . . . and hit the road.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 31, 2018 10:44:52 GMT -5
Nuanced response with parsed language? Isn't an abbreviated version of that what the college put forth the other day? PB et al can see where that got them with Bishop McManus and if that is what is forthcoming, then I believe he will be on the next bus out of town.
I personally believe/hope that we are at a watershed moment in our college's history in which we can and will reaffirm the truly Catholic nature and mission of Holy Cross. Academic freedom is a cornerstone of a truly Liberal Arts education but a Jesuit inspired pursuit of the truth is a much higher calling. This pursuit that most here undertook at HC and then beyond that strikes me as not providing the freedom to challenge but rather the obligation to challenge those who would pervert -- or allow/facilitate the perversion of -- the teachings within Scripture upon which our college was founded.
Fight on . . . and Let's Win!!
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 31, 2018 9:54:41 GMT -5
“Holy Cross was closed Friday in observance of Good Friday. The college’s president, the Rev. Philip L. Boroughs, in a written statement on Thursday,“I understand that it was Good Friday but simply shutting down the school without someone on call to answer for this crap is just ridiculous. The leadership in Fenwick is totally clueless. Beyond time to send them all packing. They did answer. Not the way they should have, but they answered. They clearly should have blasted this guy in a similar way that the Bishop did. But apparently they aren’t capable of that. What they need right now is a crisis manager and it appears that they don’t have one on staff. I’m preparing for one of Fr Boroughs long, meandering letters that don’t say a whole lot. Does anyone know a member of the board of trustees? An email address that doesn’t go through Mt St James? This is nuts! Spense, check your PM. Not appropriate to provide a public listing of the BOT's emails but I am happy to share if anybody might care via PM. Send me a PM so as not to tie up the discourse here. I will then send a group PM.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 31, 2018 6:36:32 GMT -5
Here is the Bishop's statement which certainly seems to have been forthcoming in light of what the college and Fr. Boroughs had to say -- or not say -- the other day.
I fully concur with each and every word put forth by Bishop McManus and would have hoped that Fr. Boroughs would have made a statement of this sort. Looks to me like Bishop McManus just dressed PB down in royal fashion. The implications of that undressing and the impact it makes on the BOT will be very interesting. I applaud the Bishop for responding so strongly and so quickly. This is my definition of leadership.
Statement by Most Reverend Robert J. McManus, STD, Bishop of Worcester on the writings of Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew about the true nature of Jesus Christ
March 30, 2018, Worcester MA – A few days ago I learned of the highly controversial writings of a local Holy Cross professor, Tat-siong Benny Liew, that cast doubts on the male sexuality of Jesus Christ based on Professor Liew’s seriously flawed analysis of some texts of the Gospel of St. John. I am deeply troubled and concerned to hear that someone who holds an endowed chair in New Testament studies at the College of the Holy Cross has authored such highly offensive and blasphemous notions. Such positions have no place in the biblical scholarship of a professor who teaches at a Catholic college and who, as such, should be supportive of the college’s Catholic identity and mission.
Fr. Philip Boroughs, SJ, president of the College of the Holy Cross, has stated publicly that Professor Liew “is a man of deep faith” but that “scholars are … free to push boundaries on widely accepted thought.” Academic freedom certainly plays a critical role in the intellectual life of a Catholic institution of higher learning like Holy Cross. However, how that academic freedom is exercised, particularly in the fields of Theology or Religious Studies, cannot provide cover for blatantly unorthodox teaching. Clearly the biblical conclusions that Professor Liew has reached in his writings are both false and perverse. I am particularly concerned that Professor Liew’s book that contains these unorthodox views is featured on display in the Religious Studies Department at Holy Cross.
The Church is the steward of her authentic Catholic faith, and Catholic institutions of higher learning have the mission to teach the normative faith of the Church in communion with the Church’s authentic Magisterium. The U.S. bishops, relying on St. John Paul II’s insightful document, Ex Corde Ecclesiae, (“From the Heart of the Church”) about the nature and purpose of Catholic universities, have asked Catholic colleges to reaffirm their Catholic identity in all aspects of their intellectual endeavors. Central to the orthodox faith of the Church is the acceptance of Jesus Christ as fully divine and fully human that the early Fathers of the Church and the Church’s Councils so clearly taught. In light of the controversy caused by Professor Liew’s writings, Holy Cross has a duty to, at least, ask Professor Liew if he rejects the biblical positions he penned some ten years ago or if he supports and defends those positions today. If he disavows them, then he must state so publicly, so as not to create confusion about the nature of Christ. If he does not, then it is my duty as the Bishop of Worcester to clearly state that such teaching is a danger to the integrity of the Catholic faith and, in prudence, warn the Catholic faithful committed to my pastoral care that such unorthodox teaching has no place in a Catholic College whose mission is to promote and cultivate the Catholic intellectual tradition.
It is particularly disheartening for me to be addressing this issue during Holy Week. Our commemoration of the Easter Triduum, namely Holy Thursday, Good Friday and Easter Sunday, would be meaningless if we did not recognize the suffering that Jesus Christ as the God-man bore for us and that our relationship to him as Savior is the most important dimension of our Christian lives. May our hearts and minds as Christians remain focused on bringing ourselves and one another to a deeper appreciation of the Easter celebration of Christ’s resurrection which is the source of hope for the world.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 30, 2018 12:15:07 GMT -5
I would like to hear from Professor Liew, Religious Studies chair Fr. Reiser, Dean Frieje, Fr. Boroughs, and board chair John Mahoney.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 30, 2018 10:34:47 GMT -5
Galatians 6:7 Stop being deceived; God is not to be ridiculed. A person harvests whatever he plants:
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 30, 2018 8:23:09 GMT -5
Academic freedom? I guess that could ultimately cover anything and everything that a professor -- and especially a tenured one at that -- might want to put forth in his class. Is there no line of demarcation?
So, I guess it would then be allowed for Professor Liew to engage his students and have them actually recreate the scenes he depicts in his writings in his class, right? I mean, they are his interpretations of the Scripture and he is a man of faith as we are informed by Fr. Boroughs.
Academic freedom, right?
So while we are told that we need to forego the image of a knight because it might be deemed to be offensive to some in the community, we are told that we need to tolerate and accept vile, blasphemous interpretations of the key parts of Scripture that are the foundation of our faith under the umbrella of academic freedom.
Fr. Boroughs informs us that he knows Professor Liew to be a man of faith. I have never met a man of faith who interprets and writes of Scripture in such a perverted fashion.
This fight has just begun.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 29, 2018 21:13:53 GMT -5
The question before the court here ultimately is whether Holy Cross is a Catholic college in name, principle, and practice or not? For those who would view these written words -- AND the thought process of a professor in an Endowed Chair who penned them -- under the umbrella of a form of academic freedom, I guess there is absolutely NO line of demarcation as to what it is deemed unacceptable. Would you want a son or daughter in a classroom where views of this sort or views influenced by this thought process are shared? Before you answer that question, I encourage you to go back and reread and ponder the quoted materials within the article at The Fenwick Review. I have to assume that the Dean and Chair of the Department were involved in the hiring of Professor Liew. As such, I also would assume that they would have -- or should have -- reviewed all of his prior written works and research. They should be called on the carpet and share what they knew or did not know and what they revealed in the hiring process. The same goes for those involved in the tenure process. There were either serious breakdowns in both hiring and tenure OR we have a MUCH MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM/CANCER in our midsts. I personally believe Fr. Boroughs should ultimately summarily dismiss Professor Liew and welcome meeting him in court if he so desires. Those in positions of authority both on and off campus are going to be seriously tested here. He failed the test . . . massively. A sad day in the history of Alma Mater and one that I believe will prove to be exceptionally costly.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 29, 2018 10:50:46 GMT -5
I'm a bit concerned with the kid right now balancing his acceptances at HC, Fordham and Providence College . Complex theological discussions and academic inquiry defenses aside, this makes HC look silly to parents and kids. Yes, the crusader debacle can be written off as typical (albeit self-inflicted) campus PC but this latest episode smacks of some sort of ding-dong and second-rate exercise in peculiar self-loathing (coming as it does from an overtly Catholic school named Holy Cross). Won't help our reputation - and why should it? Nails it. First Rule of Management: ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS protect the name so as to promote the brand. This situation is currently a colossal failure on that front. Another example that "when you sleep with dogs, you wake up with fleas."
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 29, 2018 9:31:42 GMT -5
The question before the court here ultimately is whether Holy Cross is a Catholic college in name, principle, and practice or not?
For those who would view these written words -- AND the thought process of a professor in an Endowed Chair who penned them -- under the umbrella of a form of academic freedom, I guess there is absolutely NO line of demarcation as to what it is deemed unacceptable.
Would you want a son or daughter in a classroom where views of this sort or views influenced by this thought process are shared? Before you answer that question, I encourage you to go back and reread and ponder the quoted materials within the article at The Fenwick Review.
I have to assume that the Dean and Chair of the Department were involved in the hiring of Professor Liew. As such, I also would assume that they would have -- or should have -- reviewed all of his prior written works and research. They should be called on the carpet and share what they knew or did not know and what they revealed in the hiring process. The same goes for those involved in the tenure process. There were either serious breakdowns in both hiring and tenure OR we have a MUCH MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM/CANCER in our midsts.
I personally believe Fr. Boroughs should ultimately summarily dismiss Professor Liew and welcome meeting him in court if he so desires.
Those in positions of authority both on and off campus are going to be seriously tested here.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 28, 2018 8:52:09 GMT -5
Diversity of informed, intelligent, and educated opinion? All for it.
Verbal diarrhea that many would define justifiably as heretical blasphemy for 67k? I welcome properly calling TPTB out on it and plan on doing just that.
Last time we ventured down a path such as this, Gerry Reedy was on the next bus out of town.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 28, 2018 7:58:15 GMT -5
How many read the article in the Fenwick Review, rather than rely on Breitbart? Definitely should and need to read the article by current senior Elinor Reilly in the Fenwick Review. I also encourage people to read the comments at Breitbart as those are an indication of the damage the college faces from a PR standpoint. The Breitbart article has gone absolutely viral. I do wonder whether Professor Liew weighed in on the debate regarding the Crusader and made any public comments on that topic.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 28, 2018 7:01:31 GMT -5
I just wrote to Fr. Reiser, chair of the Religious Studies Department, to request his views on this. If others care to do the same, here you go:
wreiser@holycross.edu
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 28, 2018 6:18:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 28, 2018 5:59:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 27, 2018 14:25:40 GMT -5
This whole topic reminds me of the many many times I have sat in my regular pew at church and pondered on the wisdom provided by men of the cloth. (More than a few times upon exiting the church, I have informed the priest that I did not agree with the position he was putting forth.) Yet whether I agree or disagree with the words within those homilies, I ultimately try to shift my line of vision and express my gratitude to the man on the cross and the sacrifice he made for me.
Everything else seems to fall into line from there.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 26, 2018 14:37:10 GMT -5
If I am not mistaken, those leaning right tend to be more charitable when it comes to supporting philanthropic efforts. Can we ever forget the alligator arms on Crazy Uncle Joe: Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden and his wife gave an average of $369 a year to charity during the past decade, his tax records show.
Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's campaign today released 10 years' worth of tax returns for Biden, a senator from Delaware, and his wife Jill, a community college instructor. The Bidens reported earning $319,853 last year, including $71,000 in royalties for his memoir, Promises to Keep: On Life and Politics.
The Bidens reported giving $995 in charitable donations last year — about 0.3% of their income and the highest amount in the past decade. The low was $120 in 1999, about 0.1% of yearly income.
Over the decade, the Bidens reported a total of $3,690 in charitable donations, or 0.2% of their income.
Then-Vice President Al Gore came under fire when his 1997 tax return showed only $353 in donations to charity; abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=5791846&page=1#embarrassing
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Feb 16, 2018 9:44:15 GMT -5
A little food for thought that certainly seems applicable to the topic at hand: dailycaller.com/2018/02/15/clarence-thomas-decries-victimhood/Clarence Thomas Decries Victimhood Culture In Rare Public RemarksKEVIN DALEY Supreme Court Reporter 6:11 PM 02/15/2018 Justice Clarence Thomas decried the contemporary culture of victimhood during remarks Thursday, telling an audience at the Library of Congress that constant aggrievement would exhaust the country.
Ever a touchstone for controversy on racial issues, the justice related a story from a recent trip to Kansas, where a black college student told him she was primarily interested in school work, and less interested in the political tumult gripping college campuses.
“At some point we’re going to be fatigued with everybody being a victim,” he said.
Thomas has struck similar chords throughout his public life. He appeared on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News program in November 2017, and suggested contemporary activists could benefit from the example of his grandparents, who exhibited quiet fortitude during the heady days of white supremacy.
He made his Thursday remark in the context of a broader discussion about his childhood. Thomas was born in Georgia’s coastal lowlands among impoverished Gullah-speakers, and spent his childhood working his grandfather’s farm. He likened his upbringing to Kathryn Stockett’s 2009 novel “The Help” as most of the women in his life, including his mother, were domestics in white households.
Given the few options open to blacks in the Jim Crow south, Thomas’ family felt they had no choice but to do the best with what they had. The justice detects the hand of providence in those select opportunities open to him, like parochial education and Savannah’s Carnegie library, which served the black population. “You always have to play the hand you’re dealt,” he said. “If you’re dealt a bad hand, you still have to play it.”
As detailed in his 2008 memoir, he inherited these sensibilities from his grandfather. Thomas was sent to live with his grandparents after a fire ravaged his mother’s home during his childhood.
By Thomas’ telling, his grandfather was the defining figure of his life. When he joined the Supreme Court in 1991, his wife commissioned a bust featuring his grandfather’s favorite quote.
“His favorite quote was ‘Old Man Can’t is dead. I helped bury him,'” Thomas said. (LD edit)
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Feb 15, 2018 9:05:57 GMT -5
“That we need to keep publicly affirming our tolerance highlights the fact that we face serious challenges as we try to reconcile the school that Holy Cross wants to be with the school that it is and has been,” the professor said in an email.
The school that it is and has been?
Are you kidding me?
Put her comment on a low burn and ponder what pearls of wisdom Professor Francis might be sharing with those students currently taking her classes.
IMO, she has NO idea what sort of college Holy Cross is and has been. As such, I believe she owes the administration, the students, and the HC alumni an enormous apology.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Jan 15, 2018 16:22:55 GMT -5
Just sent this message out to the faithful and welcome sharing it with the die hard Crusaders who frequent these parts.
Fellow Crusaders,
Hard to believe but it was 10 years ago in the spring of 2008 that the idea of formally organizing the Crusader Football Alumni efforts was launched among a small handful of die hard Crusaders. What were then only some thoughts among a small group of friends have become realities over this past decade that have formed and strengthened relationships across generations of truly great Crusaders.
As with every initiative, there comes a time when a changing of the guard is healthy and fruitful to the long term well being of the undertaking. On that note, after countless epiphanies, solicitations, and calls to rally the troops, I welcome informing you that my good friend and classmate Spenser Huston '83 is taking the reins in leading the Friends of Crusader Football. I greatly appreciate Spenser's strong support of our efforts over the last few years and am confident under his leadership, the FoCF will only be more impactful in the years ahead. I welcome providing him my strong support and counsel over the coming years.
While I pass the torch to Spenser, I am pleased to let you know that I will continue to focus my efforts on spearheading our 90-Wide Mentoring Program and making that specific program within the FoCF "best in class."
I would be remiss in writing if I did not express my deepest gratitude to all the Crusaders who have embraced me and our efforts over the years. Neither time nor space allows me to list individually all of those deserving of my thanks. As I told Gordie Lockbaum a few weeks back, "I have gotten far more than I could ever give and I would not trade the great friendships I have developed for the world." I am truly grateful.
I would like to make one final collective request:
1. Please continue to support Spenser and the Friends so that generations from now our efforts will continue to resonate and others will boldly carry the torch. 2. Embrace and support Coach Chesney, his staff, and the Crusaders. Winning is a byproduct of great enthusiasm and unbridled motivation on every front. 3. Proudly wear the Purple and live the mission of what it means to be a Crusader. 4. Elevate the great name of Alma Mater, always pay it forward, and spare no sacrifice in the commitment to excellence and pursuit of victory.
With deepest gratitude,
LET'S WIN!!
LD '83
Friends of Crusader Football Vision: Elevate the great name of the College of the Holy Cross Mission: A commitment to excellence in helping the Crusaders win on and off the field by celebrating the great traditions of Holy Cross Football, impacting current Crusaders, and developing a culture that will serve to attract future Crusaders to Mt. St. James by showing them what it truly means to bleed Purple.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Jan 5, 2018 9:58:59 GMT -5
|
|