Americans’ role in the surveillance state

Paul Engel

Sun Aug 9 The Constitution Study

The United States is quickly becoming a surveillance state. While this rightly concerns many people, I don’t think they realize how much of a role they play in this trek toward a dystopian future.

People are concerned about Flock and other license plate readers, never considering that it’s our desire for government to keep us safe that is driving the need for surveillance. To make matters worse, many are hoping the federal legislation will help protect their privacy. I guess many Americans are willing to trade a federal government with limited and enumerated powers for protection against the nightmare they created.

Meanwhile, cities and states across the nation are passing gun-owner control laws, forgetting that it is often lawful gun-owners who are saving the day while others wait for the police to show up. Maybe, if more people defended themselves and their family, police wouldn’t need all this surveillance tech.

The Constitution Study with Paul Engel on America Out Loud Talk Radio can be heard weekdays at 4:00 p.m. ET. Listen on iHeartRadio, our world-class media player, or our free Apple, Android, or Alexa apps. Listen to other episodes of The Constitution Study, which are available on podcasts.

Transcript Summary of this podcast episode ⤵

Full Transcript (Auto-Transcribed)

Americans are being told that more surveillance is the price of safety. License plate readers, body cameras, digital IDs, car kill switches, and age verification rules are all sold as common-sense protections. The pitch sounds comforting. Trust the system, and it will keep you safe.

But safety without liberty is not security. It is submission.

The Constitution protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures. It does not promise freedom from being recorded in public. The real danger comes later, when data is stored, shared, searched, and used without meaningful limits. That is where the line is crossed. A camera on a street corner is one thing. A searchable database of everywhere you have been, every plate you passed, every movement logged and cataloged, is something else entirely.

The same problem appears in other forms. Government wants to decide when your car may start, what your child may see online, and which shoppers qualify for subsidized food. Each plan is wrapped in concern for public welfare. Each one shifts power away from families, property owners, and citizens, and toward distant officials who know little about your life.

That is the trade many Americans keep making. We ask government to protect us, then act surprised when it starts controlling us. We want crime prevented, children shielded, and order restored. Those are worthy goals. Yet every new layer of control teaches the public to depend less on themselves and more on force from above.

A free people do not survive by outsourcing responsibility. They survive by taking it back.

If liberty means anything, it means ordinary citizens must defend their rights, train their children, watch out for one another, and demand real limits on government power. Otherwise, the surveillance state will keep growing, not because it was imposed on us all at once, but because too many of us welcomed it one convenience at a time.

Source

Text of Cardinal McElroy’s Red Mass homily: ‘Men and Women of the Law as Architects of Hope’

Cardinal Robert W. McElroy, the archbishop of Washington, gives the homily at the Red Mass on Oct. 5, 2025 at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington, D.C. The annual Red Mass – sponsored by the John Carroll Society of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington – is held on the day before the opening of the Supreme Court’s term, and it includes prayers for God’s guidance and blessings for those involved in the nation’s system of law and justice. At left is Msgr. Peter Vaghi, the longtime chaplain of the John Carroll Society. (John Carroll Society photo by Christopher Newkumet)

Cardinal Robert W. McElroy

Oct 5, 2025 Voices

(The following is the text of the homily given by Cardinal Robert W. McElroy, the archbishop of Washington, for the Red Mass at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 5, 2025.)

It is a great joy and personal privilege to celebrate this Mass with you as the new Supreme Court term begins. My own respect and love for the legal profession arose from observing my father serve in private practice for almost 40 years with integrity, wisdom and compassion. Through his eyes I witnessed the beauty, the struggles, the transformative grace and the hard moral dilemmas that come with a lifelong devotion to the law that never loses sight of the men and women who are affected by it.

It is with prayer for each of you that I begin this reflection – prayer that God will constantly raise your eyes to wisdom, compassion and judgment; that you may be consoled when you feel torn or adrift, that in the deepest moments of achievement and satisfaction you might understand that God is at work in you; and that the nobility of your calling will sustain you through every adversity.

On August 9 of this year, I celebrated Mass at Urakami Cathedral in Nagasaki on the 80th anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb. The cathedral, which was one of the greatest Catholic churches in Asia, lay at the very center of the targeted area in that Catholic city and was almost totally destroyed. The human devastation was horrific and unimaginable. Every element of the social fabric disintegrated in a tsunami of mourning, numbness, despair and an inability to see any pathway forward for those who had survived.

CGI 2025 | What's Next — President Clinton and Gavin Newsom

Full text of Pope Francis’ blessing ‘urbi et orbi’ for Easter 2025

Catholic News Agency / April 20, 2025 


By Pope Francis

CNA Newsroom, Apr 20, 2025 / 06:48 am

On Easter Sunday 2025, Pope Francis did not deliver his speech in person, though he briefly greeted the faithful with a brief “Brothers and Sisters, Happy Easter”.

The pope’s traditio, “urbi et orbi,” was read by Archbishop Diego Ravelli, the Master of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations, as the 88-year-old pontiff, still convalescing, was present but physically limited. Pope Francis briefly blessed the crowd after the message was read.

“Urbi et orbi” means “To the city [of Rome] and to the world.” It is a special apostolic blessing given by the pope every year on Easter Sunday, Christmas, and other special occasions.

Here is the full text of the pope’s message:


Christ is risen, alleluia!

Dear brothers and sisters, Happy Easter!

Transcript: Pope Francis’s speech to Congress

Pope Francis addresses a joint meeting of Congress urging lawmakers to take action on climate change, and sharing his views on the death penalty and immigration. (AP)

The following is the prepared text of Pope Francis’s address to a joint meeting of Congress, delivered Thursday in Washington. 

Mr. Vice-President,

Mr. Speaker,

Honorable Members of Congress,

From his private meeting with President Obama to giving the first-ever papal address before a joint session of Congress, Pope Francis did not shy away from politics during his three-day stop in Washington, D.C. (Julie Percha/The Washington Post)

Dear Friends,

I am most grateful for your invitation to address this Joint Session of Congress in “the land of the free and the home of the brave”. I would like to think that the reason for this is that I too am a son of this great continent, from which we have all received so much and toward which we share a common responsibility.

Each son or daughter of a given country has a mission, a personal and social responsibility. Your own responsibility as members of Congress is to enable this country, by your legislative activity, to grow as a nation. You are the face of its people, their representatives. You are called to defend and preserve the dignity of your fellow citizens in the tireless and demanding pursuit of the common good, for this is the chief aim of all politics. A political society endures when it seeks, as a vocation, to satisfy common needs by stimulating the growth of all its members, especially those in situations of greater vulnerability or risk. Legislative activity is always based on care for the people. To this you have been invited, called and convened by those who elected you.

Yours is a work which makes me reflect in two ways on the figure of Moses. On the one hand, the patriarch and lawgiver of the people of Israel symbolizes the need of peoples to keep alive their sense of unity by means of just legislation. On the other, the figure of Moses leads us directly to God and thus to the transcendent dignity of the human being. Moses provides us with a good synthesis of your work: you are asked to protect, by means of the law, the image and likeness fashioned by God on every human face.

Today I would like not only to address you, but through you the entire people of the United States. Here, together with their representatives, I would like to take this opportunity to dialogue with the many thousands of men and women who strive each day to do an honest day’s work, to bring home their daily bread, to save money and –one step at a time – to build a better life for their families. These are men and women who are not concerned simply with paying their taxes, but in their own quiet way sustain the life of society. They generate solidarity by their actions, and they create organizations which offer a helping hand to those most in need.

I would also like to enter into dialogue with the many elderly persons who are a storehouse of wisdom forged by experience, and who seek in many ways, especially through volunteer work, to share their stories and their insights. I know that many of them are retired, but still active; they keep working to build up this land. I also want to dialogue with all those young people who are working to realize their great and noble aspirations, who are not led astray by facile proposals, and who face difficult situations, often as a result of immaturity on the part of many adults. I wish to dialogue with all of you, and I would like to do so through the historical memory of your people.

My visit takes place at a time when men and women of good will are marking the anniversaries of several great Americans. The complexities of history and the reality of human weakness notwithstanding, these men and women, for all their many differences and limitations, were able by hard work and self-sacrifice – some at the cost of their lives – to build a better future. They shaped fundamental values which will endure forever in the spirit of the American people. A people with this spirit can live through many crises, tensions and conflicts, while always finding the resources to move forward, and to do so with dignity. These men and women offer us a way of seeing and interpreting reality. In honoring their memory, we are inspired, even amid conflicts, and in the here and now of each day, to draw upon our deepest cultural reserves.

Highlights from Pope Francis’s second full day in the U.S.

The pontiff became the first pope to address a joint meeting of Congress. He also paid visits to St. Patrick’s Church and Catholic Charities before departing for New York.

Tucker: Why isn't Dr. Fauci investigated for his role in COVID pandemic?

TRANSCRIPT

Published 4 days ago
Last Update 3 days ago

Fox News

Video

Tucker: Why isn't Dr. Fauci investigated for his role in COVID pandemic?

'Tucker Carlson Tonight' host examines why the NIAID director helped fund research at the Wuhan lab

This is a rush transcript from "Tucker Carlson Tonight," May 10, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS HOST: Good evening, and welcome to TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT. Happy Monday.

How do we assess the Biden administration's response to COVID? Well, here's one marker. It tells you pretty much everything that the White House that is supposedly so committed to science, chose as its head COVID coordinator, a man with no background at all in Science or Medicine. His name is Jeffrey Zients.

Zients ran Joe Biden's presidential transition team. That's his qualification.

He is a former management consultant from Bain who sat on the Board of Facebook. Jeffrey Zients is a political operative. That's who is overseeing COVID response for Joe Biden.

The good news is because Jeffrey Zients is nothing close to being an actual scientist, he doesn't talk like one. Occasionally, he says things whose significance the rest of us can understand clearly.

Listen to Jeffrey Zients from CNN yesterday and it becomes very clear how the White House understands this pandemic. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFF ZIENTS, WHITE HOUSE COVID-19 RESPONSE COORDINATOR: The light at the end of the tunnel is brighter and brighter. Let's keep up our guard. Let's follow the C.D.C. guidance and the C.D.C. guidance across time will allow vaccinated people more and more privileges to take off that mask.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: There it is. "The C.D.C. guidance across time will allow vaccinated people more and more privileges to take off that mask," end quote. A sentence like that raises so many questions, it is kind of hard to know where to start. But, how about here?

If vaccines work, why are any vaccinated people wearing masks ever anywhere? Seriously, Jeffrey Zients should be required to explain that slowly and with numbers so the rest of us who didn't serve on the Board of Facebook can understand. No one has asked him to explain that, of course, he hasn't. Nor has anyone asked Jeffrey Zients just how effective masks are at preventing the spread of COVID-19.

Our public health authorities act as though masks are absolutely critical, but are they absolutely critical? Where are the serious studies that prove that? Do they exist? If they do exist, is there a reason they are being hidden from the rest of us?

And finally, when did masklessness become a privilege? For thousands of years until about 12 months ago, masklessness was the global status quo. Virtually everyone on Earth lived without masks and that was not considered weird. Masks were weird. They were unhealthy and menacing.

Yet, Jeffrey Zients has just informed us that things have changed. Going forward not wearing a mask, even after you've been vaccinated is quote, "a privilege," a Scooby snack, a gold star, a pat on the head that may or may not be granted to you exclusively by the Democratic Party on the basis of no science, but purely because they're in charge and you're not, and that's called public health. And it's absolutely critical to the existence of our species that you comply with it reflexively without asking questions or thinking about it.

And this will all continue, Jeffrey Zients explained, quote "across time." What does that mean exactly? How long will this terrifyingly irrational exercise continue? For the answer to that question, we go now to a man even more partisan than Jeffrey Zients.

Here's the nation's most highly credentialed political operative, Tony Fauci, letting you know that actually, this mask thing is never going to end.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHUCK TODD, MSNBC HOST: But is the mask going to be something we have with us in a seasonal aspect?

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: You know, that's quite possible. I think people have gotten used to the fact that wearing masks clearly if you look at the data diminishes respiratory diseases. So it is conceivable that as we go on a year, or two or more from now that during certain seasonal periods, when you have respiratory-borne viruses like the flu, people might actually elect to wear masks to diminish the likelihood that you'll spread these respiratory borne diseases.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: A year or two or more from now, in other words, never. You're never taking off the mask. Get ready for a lifetime of filthy wet cotton covering your mouth, reduced oxygen flow to your brain, and a world where every stranger looks the same because no one has a face.

When Kamala Harris and her husband kissed the other day while wearing masks, they were giving you a preview of your daughter's wedding. In a masked world, human beings never really touch each other.

Is that public health? No, it's not public health, it is a kind of punishment.

Tony Fauci is punishing the country, you, us, everyone. The question is why is he doing that? Maybe he likes it. That's possible.

But you've got to think that at least part of Tony Fauci's authoritarian germ hysteria is a cover for something else. Could it be that Tony Fauci is trying to divert attention from himself and his own personal role in the COVID-19 pandemic?

Now, what do we mean by that? We cannot recommend more strongly a new piece by Nicholas Wade who for more than 50 years has been one of the preeminent science writers in the world. For 30 years, Nicholas Wade worked for "The New York Times." He edited the science section there, but this piece did not run in "The New York Times," it ran on "Medium." And the piece explains where this virus almost certainly came from.

In it, Nicholas Wade makes it clear that more than any other single living American, Tony Fauci is responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic.

Wade lays out a nearly insurmountably large amount of evidence that this virus originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Central China. It seemed to make sense, this show and others had raised the possibility from the early days of the pandemic. But this piece, all but proves it.

At the time the outbreak began last fall, the Wuhan lab was conducting experiments on how to make bat viruses infectious to human beings. Those experiments were funded by American tax dollars. Those experiments were -- their funding -- approved and directed by Tony Fauci in Washington -- by Tony Fauci.

That is hard to believe, but it's true, and the piece lays it out.

Many of the Wuhan experiments fell under the direction of a Chinese researcher called Shi Zhengli, known as the "bat lady." She was China's leading expert on bat-borne viruses. Her job was to genetically engineer coronaviruses so that they infect human beings and do so as easily as possible.

This work, Nicholas Wade notes involved, quote, " ... doing gain-of- function experiments designed to make coronavirus infect human cells." Now, why was this research going on? We'll have to ask the scientist who did it.

But the fact remains, these were some of the most dangerous experiments ever conducted by mankind, and yet we know that China was not taking necessary safety precautions and we should not be surprised by that.

Several years ago, American diplomatic cables warned about low and lax standards at the Wuhan lab. In fact, the Wuhan facility was classified as a Biosafety Level 2 Laboratory. What does that mean? Well, according to Richard Ebright, who is a molecular biologist at Rutgers, that is approximately the same level of safety that you would find in a dentist's office in America.

So that lab, conducting research experiments on the coronavirus and how to make it transmissible to human beings resulted almost certainly in the infection of a lab researcher and the virus spread from there.

The first coronavirus virus patients in fact did not come from the so- called wet market as we heard, that was a lie. The first patients of the coronavirus in fact were employees at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, at the lab.

So once again, why would the Wuhan lab be conducting experiments like that in the first place? Well, we know that Tony Fauci had authorized payment for the research. For five years, from 2014 to 2019, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases which Tony Fauci runs and has for decades, pumped money to a group called the EcoHealth Alliance.

The EcoHealth Alliance is run by man whose name you may recognize, Dr. Peter Daszak. Daszak contracted with Dr. Shi to conduct gain-of-function experiments at the Wuhan lab.

Just before the pandemic became public knowledge on December 9th, 2019, Peter Daszak sat for an interview that was streamed online. In that interview, Daszak bragged about how easy it is to manipulate coronaviruses in lab experiments.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. PETER DASZAK, ECOHEALTH ALLIANCE: Coronavirus is a pretty good, I mean, you're a virologist, you know all this stuff, but you can manipulate them in the lab pretty easily. The spike protein drives a lot of what happens with the coronavirus, zoonotic risk.

So you can get the sequence, you can build the protein and we work with Ralph Baric at UNC to do this, insert into backbone of another virus right and do some work in the lab.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: So, just days after that was shot, it became clear that this new version of coronavirus, this novel coronavirus, what we now call COVID-19 was running rampant through Wuhan, then China and then the world.

Since then, since the pandemic began, Peter Daszak, not surprisingly, has appeared on virtually every media platform available to him to deny in the most strenuous and dismissive terms the Wuhan lab could be in any way linked to the outbreak since, of course he has very personal motives for claiming that, quote: "The idea that this virus escaped from the lab is just pure baloney," he said last year, but that was a lie. It's not pure baloney, and a lot of smart people knew that right away.

One of those People as Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute at Harvard and M.I.T. She bravely wrote a paper about how the coronaviruses genome hadn't changed much over time, and that was odd, because that genome had gone through trillions of replications.

According to Chan, that fact imply that the virus was designed for human to human transmission from the outset. The former Director of the C.D.C. also clearly understood this and he, too, argued that the virus came from the Wuhan lab.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. ROBERT REDFIELD, FORMER DIRECTOR, CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION: I am of the point of view that I still think the most likely etiology of this pathogen in Wuhan was from a laboratory, you know, escaped. Other people don't believe that. That's fine.

Science will eventually figure it out. It's not unusual for respiratory pathogens that are being worked on a laboratory to infect the laboratory worker.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARLSON: Millions of people have died of COVID-19. So it's not a matter of score settling or blame assignment to figure out where it came from. If you want to prevent the next global pandemic, you have to figure out how this one started.

And so the World Health Organization said it would get to the bottom of it. The World Health Organization, of course, is beholden to China, and so it tried to hide the basic facts of the origins of this pandemic. And to hide those facts, W.H.O. appointed none other than Peter Daszak as the only America-based representative on the investigative team looking into where the virus came from.

In what turned out to be a sham report, that team concluded that it is quote, "extremely unlikely" that the virus came from the Wuhan lab. Again, that's not true.

The W.H.O.'s investigation in the origins of the virus was fraudulent and that matters to public health globally. But one thing you'll notice is that Tony Fauci did not say that. Why? Because once again, he is implicated in it personally. The gain-of-function research that Peter Daszak was bragging about in the video we just showed you had in fact, been banned explicitly by the U.S. government.

There was a Federal moratorium on the funding of exactly the kind of gain- of-function experiments that went on at the Wuhan lab due to disastrous effects. So why didn't the U.S. government halt its funding of the lab in Wuhan? That is a central question and Nicholas Wade, to his great credit, looked into it. And here's what he found, quote, "Someone wrote a loophole into the moratorium. The moratorium specifically barred funding of any gain-of-function research that increased the pathogenicity of the flu, MERS or SARS viruses. But then a footnote on Page two of the moratorium document states that quote, 'an exception from the research pause may be obtained if the head of the U.S. government funding agency determines that the research is urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security.'"

And that's exactly the loophole that was exploited. Who signed off on this? Tony Fauci, possibly, along with Francis Collins, the Director of the N.I.H. invoked that special exemption in order to keep funding the Wuhan lab and the deadly experiments that were going on there, the experiments that clearly went so wrong.

According to Richard Ebright quote, "Unfortunately, the N.I.A.I.D. Director (that would be Fauci) and the N.I.H. Director exploited this loophole to issue exemptions to projects subject to pause, preposterously asserting that the exempted research was, quote, 'urgently necessary to protect public health or national security and thereby nullifying the pause.'"

This wouldn't have happened if Tony Fauci didn't allow it to happen. That is clear.

It's an amazing story. It is a shocking story.

In a functional country, there would be a criminal investigation currently underway into Tony Fauci's role in the COVID pandemic that has killed millions and halted our country and changed it forever. So why isn't there a criminal investigation into Tony Fauci's role in this pandemic?

Mike Gallagher is a Member of Congress from the State of Wisconsin. We're happy to have him on the show tonight. Congressman, thanks so much for coming on.

To read this piece by Nicholas Wade, who I who I think is as eminent as any science writer in the world, it makes me wonder why didn't we know this before and why isn't any law enforcement agency doing anything about it?

REP. MIKE GALLAGHER (R-WI): Well, Tucker, if you'll remember a year ago, when those of us were suggesting that the lab leak hypothesis just needed to be investigated. We weren't saying that it was the correct hypothesis, we were called bigots. We were called tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists.

And the problem -- and the mainstream media did everything possible to spread CCP propaganda and shut the voices of those who merely wanted that hypothesis investigated because a global pandemic completely overturned and destroyed our lives and forever changed our country.

But now we know that there may have been U.S. taxpayer funding that went to gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and the evidence continues to stack up in favor of the lab leak hypothesis. Even China's version of the C.D.C. dismissed the wet market hypothesis. So why won't the mainstream media ask basic questions of Dr. Fauci given that they have him on every single Sunday show every week?

Instead, he gets asked questions about seasonal mask wearing and how we're going to have to have 80 percent of Americans vaccinated and kids are going to have to be vaccinated. They're asking him every question, except for the questions that matter.

We need to get to the bottom of this, if for no other reason, as you suggested, we can't allow this to happen again. And more to the point, there are those proposing that we are going to increase funding from over $200 million to $1.2 billion for gain-of-function research. That would be insane, if indeed, the lab leak hypothesis is correct, as I think the evidence suggesting it, it might be.

CARLSON: I think I've misread the story from the first day. I imagined that the media blackout on the origins of coronavirus was designed to protect the Chinese government. But the U.S. government is implicated in this deeply and the story that Wade tells is of incompetence on the Chinese side, and then lying and authoritarian -- you know, the kind of predictable Chinese government behavior.

But on the American side, you see people going around a moratorium on dangerous experiments, Tony Fauci signing off on it. And those are the people, the Americans who made this possible, whose -- I would call them crimes -- are being covered up by the media in this country.

GALLAGHER: And to put Daszak on the W.H.O. investigatory team makes absolutely no sense because he has a clear conflict of interest, his entire livelihood, his entire professional reputation is bound up in the very idea of gain-of-function research.

We had other American citizens nominated to be on that team that the Chinese effectively vetoed, and they put Daszak on the team, even the head of the W.H.O., Dr. Tedros said that the investigation was incomplete and we need to examine the lab leak hypothesis.

Again, I don't see a more pressing question in the world and the fact that people in the media, people in our own government don't want to get to the bottom of it is a failure in every level. One thing they could do, Tucker, is declassify all the Intelligence immediately. The Biden administration can do that. Get it out there, full transparency.

CARLSON: This is criminal. I mean, if you were mixing dangerous chemicals in your basement and you blew up the neighborhood and killed thousands of people, you would be criminally liable for that and saying it was a mistake wouldn't be enough to get you out of those charges. This is criminal. I don't think there is any question.

Congressman, thanks so much. I appreciate it, Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin.

Read more@

Source

Coronavirus Will Likely Change The Nature Of U.S. Political Debate (Update) Transcript

5-Minute Listen

With Congress taking unprecedented measures to respond to the coronavirus pandemic and a deep economic shock to the country, the crisis is poised to deeply reshape political dynamics in the U.S.


NOEL KING, HOST:

This pandemic could permanently change the way we live. There will almost certainly be more handwashing and more telework in the future. But could it also cause lasting political and policy changes? National political correspondent Mara Liasson has some answers.

MARA LIASSON, BYLINE: There are a lot of people who think the pandemic could reshape politics in profound ways.

ANNE-MARIE SLAUGHTER: This crisis is a time machine to the future.

LIASSON: Anne-Marie Slaughter, CEO of the New America think tank, was the former director of policy planning at the Obama State Department.

SLAUGHTER: I think we'll look back and see that this was like the Great Depression or a war and that created political space to make big policy change that seemed just too hard even two months ago.

LIASSON: Big policy changes that could rearrange traditional political divisions. Now that Republicans in the Senate have voted unanimously for policies they've opposed in the past, like paid sick leave, a guaranteed minimum income, student debt relief, protections for renters and for gig economy workers. Of course, this massive package of federal help for ordinary people is only temporary, but Slaughter says it has the potential to permanently change the political debate.

SLAUGHTER: Suddenly, in a crisis like this, people realize across the political spectrum that unless we can provide a floor, the whole economy can crash - that paid sick leave is not about coddling workers. It's about making sure that sick workers don't come to work and infect others. People are equally realizing if workers have no money to spend, the economy can't function.

LIASSON: Democrats have advocated many of these policies for decades. But now that Congress has approved the largest federal intervention in the economy since the creation of Medicare, they see a new opportunity to push for big investments in modern digital infrastructure, like 5G, a better public health system, universal health insurance that doesn't disappear when you lose your job and a stronger social safety net.

As he endorsed Joe Biden last week, former President Barack Obama was making this argument.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

BARACK OBAMA: The vast inequalities created by the new economy are easier to see now, but they existed long before this pandemic hit. Health professionals, teachers and delivery drivers, grocery clerks, cleaners - the people who truly make our economy run, they've always been essential. And for years, too many of the people who do the essential work of this country have been underpaid, financially stressed and given too little support.

LIASSON: Democrats aren't the only ones who see a political opportunity in the pandemic. The nationalist populist wing of the Republican Party that's been warning about the dangers of globalization has also gotten a boost, says conservative J.D. Vance, the author of "Hillbilly Elegy."

JD VANCE: One of the core arguments of the Trump 2016 campaign is that in our supply chains in our manufacturing economy, we had become too dependent on a globalized world, especially China. It turns out that if you want to have an economy that can weather a crisis, you actually have to be able to make some core things for yourself, whether it's wireless technology, whether it's pharmaceutical products, whether it's ventilators and hospital masks.

LIASSON: And that's exactly the argument that you're hearing from Peter Navarro, President Trump's pandemic equipment czar.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

PETER NAVARRO: If there's any vindication of the president's buy American, secure borders and a strong manufacturing base philosophy, strategy and belief, it is this crisis.

LIASSON: On trade, the pandemic gives a clear advantage to the antiglobalists in the GOP led by President Trump. But on domestic policies and the role of the federal government, while Democrats know what they want, Republicans aren't so sure, says Henry Olsen, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington.

HENRY OLSEN: I think the debate within the Republican Party over what it stands for has been heating up, and the pandemic is going to kick it into overdrive. That you've got the people who are holding on to the neolibertarian version of the past but the - you've seen more and more calls for reform, which is moving more in the direction of engaging the Democrats on their core issue, which is how do we help people rather than saying the government can't help people?

LIASSON: There are already lots of splits. Conservative freshman Senator Josh Hawley, for instance, wants to beef up the social safety net. He's advocating a European-style unemployment backstop, where the federal government would pay companies 80% of wages to prevent layoffs. But other Republicans support nothing more than the current temporary emergency measures. And in addition to Tea Party-style protests against the stay-at-home orders, there's also conservative pushback to the exponential increases in federal spending - even temporarily.

But despite those Republican tensions, J.D. Vance says, it will be hard for the president and his party to continue to argue that popular programs like Obamacare should be eliminated lock, stock and barrel.

VANCE: I think the appetite for small government, everyone-is-on-their-own approach to the welfare state - frankly, it was always pretty small, and it's going to be even smaller, I think, over the next couple of years.

LIASSON: Especially, says Vance, when there are at least 22 million people who've applied for unemployment benefits. How this debate resolves itself depends on how long the pandemic recession lasts and how popular the government rescue programs turn out to be. But until then, the pandemic has given both parties an opportunity to appeal to the vast number of Americans who will need help from the federal government for some time to come.

Mara Liasson, NPR News.


Source

Voices From The Southern Border: Perspectives Of Those Who Live And Work There Every Day

January 13, 20197:43 AM ET

Heard on Weekend Edition Sunday




Lulu Garcia-Navarro

President Trump has called what's happening on the U.S.-Mexico border a "crisis." But what is it like for the doctors, judges, mayors and border patrol agents who live and work there?


LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, HOST:

To justify the need for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, Trump has repeatedly described the situation at the border as a crisis. But what is it like for the doctors, aid workers, judges, mayors and border patrol agents who live and work along the border every day? We talked to people from every single border state - California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas - and asked them, what are they experiencing? While the people we spoke with agree there is a crisis, they differ over the kind of crisis and how to solve it. Here's what they said.

NORMA PIMENTEL: I am Sister Norma Pimentel. And I'm director for Catholic Charities here in the Rio Grande Valley, overseeing the humanitarian response that we have here in our border. I believe that people that are not from here don't have quite a complete picture of what life is here at the border.

And unfortunately, when we hear all these narrative of the importance of wall and sending out criminals and protecting us from crime and all these ugly people that are coming, I realize that they're failing to see a part of the immigration reality that we see on a daily basis - people who are just like us, who are suffering and hurting and in need of great help. I believe what our Holy Father speaks to us about - the importance of building bridges and not walls.

Why a compromise on gender identity, however well-intended, is a disaster for religious liberty

THE BRIEFING

Thursday, Dec. 13, 2018


Audio
Download MP3

Play16:32

World News Group (J.C. Derrick)

Boards back SOGI compromise

New York Times (Laurie Goodstein)

Utah Passes Antidiscrimination Bill Backed by Mormon Leaders

TRANSCRIPT


The Briefing

December 13, 2018

This is a rush transcript. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

It's Thursday, December 13, 2018. I'm Albert Mohler and this is The Briefing, a daily analysis of news and events from a Christian worldview.

Why a compromise on gender identity, however well-intended, is a disaster for religious liberty


A big issue has been brewing within evangelical circles. It has been waiting for the moment to public disclosure, and that moment has come. Yesterday, World Magazine ran an article by J. C. Derrick entitled Boards Back: SOGI Compromise. That is sexual orientation and gender identity compromise. The subhead, Major Christian Groups Endures Framework to Expand LGBT Rights in Exchange for Religious Protections. Derrick gets right to the point when he tells us two major evangelical organizations have formally endorsed principles that would add sexual orientation and gender identity. That's SOGI, to federal nondiscrimination law.

Now if you just start with that opening sentence, it tells us that two major evangelical organizations, that tells us something, this is a big story, have formally endorsed, that tells us we're talking about official action, not just something under consideration. Principles that would add sexual orientation and gender identity to federal nondiscrimination law. Now if all you have is that introductory sentence, you would want to ask a big question. Why would two major evangelical organizations do any such thing? The answer is that they're trying to establish a kind of template, a compromise legally, constitutionally, politically and more importantly, perhaps, culturally.

They're trying to find a way to encourage the federal government to adopt sexual orientation and gender identity protections that would not come at the violation of religious liberty. Now that sounds like the perfect deal politically, if it were possible. That sounds like a way through this cultural impasse. On the one hand, you have one side in this moral revolution that is demanding nothing less than the coercive power of the state, and of course that includes the federal government, to force everyone to get in line with the moral revolution, especially on the issues of sexual orientation and gender identity.

On the other side, you have those who cannot by conviction join the moral revolution, and they are saying you must respect our religious liberty rights. And of course, that's the side of the argument on which you would find evangelical Christians. So what is this compromise? Is it tenable? Is it possible? The bottom line is I believe it is neither. It is not tenable, it is not possible. You can state, as many will, that it is well intended. But a well intended mistake is still a mistake. A well intended wound to religious liberty is still a wound. And that's what we're looking at here.

Transcript: Former Ambassador Susan Rice on "Face the Nation," June 10, 2018

Face The Nation
Susan Rice slams Trump for "disgraceful" Russia co...


CBS News June 10, 2018, 11:11 AM
Transcript: Former Ambassador Susan Rice on "Face the Nation," June 10, 2018



President Trump arrived in Singapore on Sunday ahead of this week's historic summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. He flew to Singapore straight from a meeting of the G7 nations in Canada, one that turned contentious over Mr. Trump's trade demands of Western allies.

Susan Rice served as U.N. ambassador and national security adviser in the Obama administration. She joined us to discuss U.S. goals at the Singapore summit, Mr. Trump's comments about Russia and more.

The following is a transcript of the interview with Rice that aired Sunday, June 10, 2018, on "Face the Nation."

MARGARET BRENNAN: We turn now to President Obama's national security adviser and former U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice. Ambassador it's good to have you here on Face the Nation.

FORMER UN AMBASSADOR SUSAN RICE: Great to be with you.

MARGARET BRENNAN: This is a historic summit. For you, what do you think the best possible outcome could be?

AMBASSADOR RICE: I think the best possible outcome is that we have more than a photo op or even a cordial conversation, but the two leaders agreed to some very concrete steps that they can then pass on to their negotiators in the form of a framework that the negotiators can then flesh out into a substantive agreement. It's going to take quite a while. This is very complicated set of issues and success can't be declared on the basis of a happy meeting.

MARGARET BRENNAN: President Obama liked to embrace diplomacy. Why did he choose not to try to negotiate with Kim Jong Un?

AMBASSADOR RICE: Well in fact there were efforts at discussions we had them during the Clinton administration, we had them during the Bush administration, and we even had opportunities and efforts during the Obama administration. The problem is that at every turn the North Koreans would make commitments and then break them and we need to be mindful that that is again what might happen in this context.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But this is a different diplomatic structure right? It's flipped on its head. You're starting with--

AMBASSADOR RICE: Starting with the leaders

MARGARET BRENNAN: --the leaders.

AMBASSADOR RICE: Yeah.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So do you give the president some credit for being willing to take this high level of risk?

AMBASSADOR RICE: Well, I think- you know it's clear that the past set of efforts have not succeeded. I am a believer in diplomacy and I am open to- to new methods of trying to accomplish the- the consistent objective that we have of full denuclearization. I think the question is are we walking in prepared? Are we walking in with our allies behind us? Are we in a position to understand that one meeting it's not going to be one and done. This is the start of a serious negotiating process.

Week In Politics: Trump's Stormy Daniels Settlement And The House Chaplain (Transcript)

(Note: This may seem redundant, but it's very important to recognize the extent of Jesuit manipulation and blatant propaganda on the Media today.)

Week In Politics: Trump's Stormy Daniels Settlement And The House Chaplain

May 4, 20184:06 PM ET
Heard on All Things Considered



NPR's Audie Cornish speaks with E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post and Brookings Institution, and David Brooks of The New York Times. They discuss Rudy Giuliani's statement about President Trump's settlement with adult film actress Stormy Daniels, the latest job numbers and the latest update about Rev. Patrick Conroy, the House Chaplain.

Transcript

AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

To talk more about this, we begin our weekly political conversation with E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post. Hey there, E.J.

E J DIONNE, BYLINE: Good to be with you.

CORNISH: And David Brooks of The New York Times, welcome back.

DAVID BROOKS, BYLINE: Thank you.

CORNISH: All right, so Scott Horsley just walked us through this debate over the timeline. And, again - Cliff Notes (ph) version - this is all over the idea the payment of $130,000 made on the eve of the 2016 election to adult film actress Stormy Daniels was made by Trump's attorney Michael Cohen. Since then, there are many more attorneys (laughter). I think America met one of them, Rudy Giuliani, this week. And by this afternoon, Rudy Giuliani had put out a statement saying, among other things, that, number one, there was no campaign violation; two, that the payment was made to resolve a personal and false allegation to protect the president's family and, three, that the payment would have been made campaign or no campaign. David, is that the end of this?

BROOKS: I'm stuck on the headline. The president of the United States paid - allegedly paid hush money to a porn star. I can't get beyond the headline. Whether this payment constitute a campaign donation, that strikes me as, like, angels dancing on the head of a pin kind of stuff. When exactly he knew what Giuliani said - this all strikes me as commentary. The core issue to me is the character issue of a guy committing adultery and paying hush money to a porn star. Why do we need to go any further?

CORNISH: E.J., does does the morality part bother you, or is there really a question about campaign finance law, which David says is about dancing on the head of a pin?

DIONNE: Well, it's not dancing on the head of a pin if it's something you can go to jail for. And so I think the campaign violation is serious, and that's why Giuliani kind of had to contradict himself. If you work for Trump, you always have to change your own story. You always get rebuked by him, and you always get soiled.

I was trying to think of an analogy of Donald Trump hiring Rudy Giuliani as his lawyer, and all I can think of is, like, the Flying Wallendas hiring P.T. Barnum. I mean, this is a crazy combination. And I know that I have predicted 22 of the last two Trump crises, so I don't always trust myself on this. But I think something has broken this week. Their language about the Mueller investigation is sharp, and Rod Rosenstein gave what seemed like a long goodbye basically saying, I am not going to violate my oath.

And my colleague Dan Balz at The Washington Post, who's one of the most respected people in journalism - right, left, Republican, Democrat - began a piece by saying, does it bother anyone that President Trump has been caught lying? And he goes on from there. Something is happening now that I think takes us to a new place. And I say that as someone skeptical myself.

CORNISH: Yeah, David...

BROOKS: I'm skeptical.

CORNISH: Get in a - a word in edgewise here.

Full Text of Gaudete et Exsultate in English

APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION
GAUDETE ET EXSULTATE
OF THE HOLY FATHER
FRANCIS
ON THE CALL TO HOLINESS
IN TODAY’S WORLD



1. “REJOICE AND BE GLAD” (Mt5:12), Jesus tells those persecuted or humiliated for his sake. The Lord asks everything of us, and in return he offers us true life, the happiness for which we were created. He wants us to be saints and not to settle for a bland and mediocre existence. The call to holiness is present in various ways from the very first pages of the Bible. We see it expressed in the Lord’s words to Abraham: “Walk before me, and be blameless” (Gen17:1).

2. What follows is not meant to be a treatise on holiness, containing definitions and distinctions helpful for understanding this important subject, or a discussion of the various means of sanctification. My modest goal is to repropose the call to holiness in a practical way for our own time, with all its risks, challenges and opportunities. For the Lord has chosen each one of us “to be holy and blameless before him in love” (Eph 1:4).



CHAPTER ONE

THE CALL TO HOLINESS

THE SAINTS WHO ENCOURAGE AND ACCOMPANY US

3. The Letter to the Hebrews presents a number of testimonies that encourage us to “run with perseverance the race that is set before us” (12:1). It speaks of Abraham, Sarah, Moses, Gideon and others (cf. 11:1-12:3). Above all, it invites us to realize that “a great cloud of witnesses” (12:1) impels us to advance constantly towards the goal. These witnesses may include our own mothers, grandmothers or other loved ones (cf. 2 Tim 1:5). Their lives may not always have been perfect, yet even amid their faults and failings they kept moving forward and proved pleasing to the Lord.

4. The saints now in God’s presence preserve their bonds of love and communion with us. The Book of Revelation attests to this when it speaks of the intercession of the martyrs: “I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne; they cried out with a loud voice, ‘O sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge?’” (6:9-10). Each of us can say: “Surrounded, led and guided by the friends of God… I do not have to carry alone what, in truth, I could never carry alone. All the saints of God are there to protect me, to sustain me and to carry me”.[1]

5. The processes of beatification and canonization recognize the signs of heroic virtue, the sacrifice of one’s life in martyrdom, and certain cases where a life is constantly offered for others, even until death. This shows an exemplary imitation of Christ, one worthy of the admiration of the faithful.[2] We can think, for example, of Blessed Maria Gabriella Sagheddu, who offered her life for the unity of Christians.

Why shopping on Sunday is a controversial economic idea in Greece

WORLD

Why shopping on Sunday is a controversial economic idea in Greece


December 22, 2016 at 6:25 PM EST

Americans take shopping on a Sunday for granted. But Greece, a heavily religious country, has been reluctant to embrace the concept. Now, seven years into a financial crisis, the International Monetary Fund is insisting that the government allow Sunday shopping, in an effort to kickstart the economy. Special correspondent Malcolm Brabant reports.

MALCOLM BRABANT: This woman is unburdening her troubles to Saint Spyridon. Elsewhere millions of Greeks are crying silent tears of anger at what they perceive as the injustice of a never ending financial crisis.

For the “PBS NewsHour”, I’m Malcolm Brabant in Athens.here. However, in Greece, it remains a major point of contention, pitting religious tradition against recent economic realities.

Special correspondent Malcolm Brabant reports.

SUNUNU: CLINTONS ‘HAVE EMPOWERED’ THE ‘CULTURE OF CORRUPTION’ ACROSS THE COUNTRY

Uploaded 10/28/2016 08:51 pm
Owner NoMorCocktails


Not online media

Transcript

RUSH TRANSCRIPT:


CAVUTO: “Former Republican governor, John sununu. What do you think of this?”

SUNUNU: “You used the right technical term. You said kind of hinting. This letter was kind of hitting, and I don’t think it’s going to go anywhere legally. It might but I doubt it. And I think Republicans have to be careful because in or two three days you may get a Comey, never mind, but it does provide a political reality, and in the context of the Wikileaks e-mails that are out there I think the Republicans ought to put is as part of the culture of corruption that is involved in the Clinton operation.

CAVUTO: “Do you think this will be resolved one way or the other in a few days?”

SUNUNU: “I doubt it. I doubt it. But there is always the possibility. And you must operate at if there is a possibility. And that is why I suggest that the focus be on the climate of corruption that’s adds to and that the climate of corruption that starts at the Clintons go toes the democratic national committee, where they stuck it to Bernie — and it’s really oozing down to local campaigned. I have a sound running for governor and the democratic candidate wouldn’t discuss irvs associated with the certain contract and re-open them. Nobody could figure it out. And then the found out he took 40,000 decide from the people that took it. There’s a culture of corruption that perfect E permeates the democratic process across the country. They’re attacking candidates on personal things and the Clintons have empowered this.”

CAVUTO: “Now, you’re quite right, always a possibility that the director comes forward and says, I’ve conditioned this and tried to be aware thief calendar and the time it is resolved. Even if that is not the case, the fact of the matter is, it was through an outside case that these e-mails came to light and I would imagine, governor, Americans who look as this who might not be in the weeds as you and I might be, they just look at this and say, this again. It’s a separate investigation. Into someone else and just seems like very complicated weeds, and all going back to the same issue of trust.”

SUNUNU: “Just think of what you’re saying if the clip tops may have become immune to all the corruption because there’s so much corruption. The Republicans have to deal with that. They have to put it into context and have to talk specifically. And this Bill Clinton inc. E-mail that came out from band is to me the. Classic smoking gun, if you will, on how the Clintons —“

CAVUTO: “Let me ask you, I know it’s is a political year. But we’re learning as well, governor, the White House indicated that it was not given any heads up on this FBI announcement, nor was anyone at the State Department, nor apparently any Clinton campaign officials. What do you make of all of that?”

SUNUNU: “I think there’s at least a little component of cover your butt in it, and I think the director Comey has to deal with certainly a large number of FBI agents who thought the mishandled the other one and I think he is just trying to — as part of this, thought the should do it the way you describe, without notifying anybody, so that he is not accused of having given them advance warning.”


Source

Pope Francis speaks to the Jesuits - Jesuit Congregation 36 (Update: Transcript of Speech).

To see subtitles in English 

1.Go to Settings:

2. Then, click on the Settings Icon.

3. When window opens go to the 4th title from top, Subtitles/CC (1)   Spanish (autogenerated).  

4. When a new window opens click on the Auto-translate title;

5. When a new window opens slide languages to English, then click.

Now you should see a susbtitle in English at bottom of screen.

.

------------------------------------------------------

Related

DISCOURSE OF THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS TO THE MEMBERS OF THE 36TH GENERAL CONGREGATION OF THE SOCIETY OF JESUS

24 October 2016


Dear Brothers and Friends in the Lord,

While praying over what I would like to say, I remembered with particular affection the words of Paul VI to us as we came to the end of the 32nd General Congregation: “This is the way, this is the way, Brothers and Sons. Forward, in nomine Domini. Let us walk together, free, obedient, united to each other in the love of Christ, for the greater glory of God.”1

Also, St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI have encouraged us to “lead a life worthy of the vocation to which we have been called”2 [Eph 4:1] “and following the path of mission” in full fidelity to your original charism in the ecclesial and social context that characterises this beginning of the millennium. As my predecessors have often told, the Church needs you, counts on you and continues to turn to you with confidence, particularly to reach the geographical and spiritual places where others do not reach, or find it difficult to reach.”3

Walking together – free and obedient – going to the peripheries where others do not reach, “under Jesus’ gaze and looking to the horizon which is the ever greater glory of God, who ceaselessly surprises us.”4 The Jesuit is called as Ignatius says “our vocation is to travel through the world and to live in any part of it where there is hope of greater service to God and of help of souls” [Con, 304]. That is, as Nadal used to say “for the Society the whole world is our home.”5

Ignatius wrote to Borgia regarding a criticism of the Jesuits who were called “angels” (Oviedo and Onfroy). Some critics used to say that the Society was not well instituted, that it had to be instituted more in spirit. “The Spirit which is guiding these critics” – Ignatius used to say – “does not know the state of things of the Society which are in the making, other than what is necessary (and substantial).”6 I very much appreciate Ignatius’s way of seeing things which are coming into being, removing oneself from the constraints of the concrete. It takes the Society from all that paralyses it, freeing it from frivolities.

What is “necessary and substantial” is the Formula of the Institute, which we should keep before our eyes every day, keeping our eyes on God our Lord. “The nature of this Institute which is his pathway to God.” This is how it was for the first companions and they foresaw that this is how it would be “for those who would follow us in this pathway.” So both poverty and obedience or the fact of not being obliged to sing the office in choir, are neither demands nor privileges, but aids to mobility and thus being available in the Society: “to run in the path of

Christ our Lord” [Con 582]. In virtue of the vow of obedience to the Pope we have a “surer direction from the Holy Spirit” [Formula of the Institute 3]. In the Formula, we have this Ignatian intuition. Its centrality is what makes the Constitutions stress that we always keep in mind “places, times and persons” so that all rules are aids – tantum quantum – for concrete things.

For Ignatius, being on the road is not only coming and going, but it translates into something qualitative: It is drawing profit, and progress, is going forward, to do something for others. This is how the two Formulas of the Institute, approved by Paul III [1540] and Julius III [1550] express it, when they focus the work of the Society on the faith - and its defence and propagation – and on the life and teaching of persons. So Ignatius and the first companions used the expression “to draw greater fruit” (aprovechamiento) [ad profectum,7 cf. Phil. 1:12 and 25] which is the practical criterion of discernment proper to our spirituality.

Drawing profit is not individualistic, but it is for the common good: “The end of this Society is to devote itself with Gods grace not only to the salvation and perfection of the members own souls, but also with that same grace to labour strenuously in giving aid toward the salvation and perfection of the souls of their neighbours” [General Examen, I, 2]. If at all the balance of Ignatius’ heart was inclined towards something, that was towards helping our neighbours, so much so that he used to get angry if somebody was to tell him that the reason that someone remained in the Society was “in order to save his own soul. Ignatius did not want men, who although being good, were not zealous for the service of their neighbour” (Aicardo I punto 10 p. 41).

We are to draw profit from everything. The Formula of Ignatius expresses a tension: “not only… but also…” and this conceptual framework combining tensions – the salvation and perfection of one’s own soul, and the salvation and perfection of one’s neighbour’s – from the higher realm of Grace – is proper to the Society of Jesus. The harmonization of this and of all the other tensions (contemplation and action, faith and justice, charism and institution, community and mission…) is not expressed in abstract formulations but is achieved in the course of time through what Faber called “our way of proceeding”8. Journeying and progressing in the following of the Lord, the Society moves towards harmonizing the tensions brought about by the diversity of the men whom it brings together and of the missions it receives.

Drawing profit is not elitist. In the Formula, Ignatius proceeds to describe the means for seeking the greater and more universal good which are truly sacerdotal. However, we observe that the works of mercy are taken for granted. The Formula says “without these being an obstacle” to mercy!!! Works of mercy – caring for the sick in hospitals, begging for alms, sharing, teaching catechism to children, the patient suffering of insults… are the daily bread of Ignatius and his first companions. They took care that none of these became obstacles!

Drawing profit in the final analysis is “that which they sought the most.” This is the magis, this more, which moves Ignatius to start accompanying people and helping them reflect on the various experiences of their lives with regard to faith, justice, mercy and charity. The magis is the fire, the fervour in action, awakening those who have become dormant. Our saints have always incarnated this fervour. It used to be said of St. Alberto Hurtado that he was a thorn in the flesh of the dormant Church. This militates against that temptation which Paul VI called spiritus vertiginis and de Lubac called “spiritual worldliness.” This temptation is not primarily moral, but spiritual, and distracts us from the essential: that we be fruitful persons, to let our

footsteps leave marks in history, especially in the lives of the very least in our society. “The Society is zealous”9 as Nadal used to say. To revive the zeal for mission for the greater good of persons in their life and doctrine, I would like to make more concrete these reflections in three points: given that the Society’s way of proceeding for the greater good is accomplished through joy, the cross and through the Church our Mother. We need to look at how we move forward by overcoming the impediments which the enemy of our human nature tries to put in our way when we are in the service of God and seeking the greater good.



1.- To ask insistently for consolation

We can always take a step forward asking insistently for consolation. In the two Apostolic Exhortations and in Laudato Si, I consistently underlined the importance of joy. In the Spiritual Exercises, Ignatius invites us to contemplate “the office of consolation,” which is the work of the Risen Christ Himself [Sp. Ex. 224]. This is the true work of the Society: to console the faithful people of God and to help them through discernment so that the enemy of human nature does not rob us of our joy: the joy of evangelising, the joy of the family, the joy of the Church, the joy of creation…. Let the enemy of our human nature not rob us of our joy, neither by despair before the magnitude of the evils of the world, and the misunderstandings between those who want to do good, nor let him replace it with foolish joys that are always at hand in all human enterprises.

This “service of joy and spiritual consolation” roots us in prayer. This consists in animating ourselves and animating others “to ask insistently for God’s consolation.” Ignatius formulated this in a negative way in the sixth rule of the first week when he said “It is very profitable to make rigorous changes in ourselves against desolation” by insisting more on prayer [Sp. Ex.

319] It is beneficial because one is “worth little in time of desolation.” [Sp. Ex. 324] To practice and teach this prayer of petition and supplication for consolation is the principal service we render to joy. If somebody does not consider himself worthy (something which is very common in practice), he should at least remain persistent in prayer for consolation for love of the message, because joy is constitutive of the Gospel message; he should therefore also ask for it for love of others, for his family and for the world. One cannot give a good piece of news with a sad face. Joy is not only decorative, it is also a clear indicator of grace, it shows that love is active, working and present. For this reason, in an age of instant gratification and unabated consumption, the search for joy should not be confused with the search for “a spiritual effect,” when our existential identity is more concerned with long lasting effects: Ignatius opens the eyes and wakes us up to the discernment of Spirits to discover the difference between long- lasting joys and transient joys. (Autobiography 8) Time is the key to recognising the action of the Spirit.

In the Exercises, “progress” in the spiritual life is brought about in consolation. It is to go from “good to better,” it is also “every increase in hope, faith and charity and every interior joy.” (Sp. Ex. 316) This service to joy was what led the first companions to decide not to disperse, but to institute the Society and celebrate spontaneously their companionship, which was characterised by joy and which made them pray together, go on missions together and then to reunite again, in imitation of the life of the Lord and his apostles. This joy of the explicit announcing of the Gospel - through preaching, faith and the practice of justice and mercy – is that which leads the Society to go to the peripheries. The Jesuit is a servant of the joy of the Gospel, both when he is working as an artisan, conversing and giving the spiritual exercises to a single person, helping him or her to encounter “this interior forum whence comes the power of the Spirit, which guide, free and renew him” 10 and when he is working with structures, organising works of formation, of mercy, or of reflection which are institutional expansions of

those turning points where the individual will is broken down and the Spirit enters to act. As M. de Certeau rightly said: The Spiritual Exercises are the apostolic method par excellence” which made possible the “a return to the heart, the beginning of docility to the Spirit which awakens and propels the exercitant to personal fidelity to God”.

2.- Letting ourselves be moved by our Lord placed on the cross

We can always take a step forward in letting ourselves be moved by the Lord crucified, by him in person, by him present in so many of our brothers and sisters who are suffering – the great majority of humankind! Father Arrupe used to say that wherever there is pain, the Society is there.

The Jubilee of Mercy is an appropriate time to reflect about the works of mercy. I have deliberately used the plural, because mercy is not an abstract word, but a lifestyle that places concrete gestures before the word. These gestures touch the flesh of the neighbour and become institutionalised in works of mercy. For those who do the Exercises this grace by which Jesus commands us to resemble the Father (cf. Lk 6:36), begins with this colloquy of mercy which is the expansion of the colloquy with the Lord placed on the cross for my sins. The entire second exercise is a colloquy full of sentiments of shame, confusion, pain and grateful tears, seeing who I am – making myself less – and who God is – making Him more – “who has given me life till now” – who Jesus is, hanging on the cross for me (Exx. 61 and preceding). The way Ignatius lives and formulates his experience of mercy is of great personal and apostolic benefit, and requires an acute and sustained experience of discernment. Our father said to Borgia: “I am personally convinced regarding myself that both before and after I am totally an obstacle. Because of this I feel increased spiritual happiness and joy in the Lord in as much as I cannot attribute to myself even a semblance of good.”12 So Ignatius lives from the pure mercy of God even in the smallest details of his life and of his person. And he used to feel that, the greater an obstacle he might pose, the more Lord treated him with goodness: “Such was the mercy of the Lord, and such was the abundance of his tenderness and the sweetness of his grace with him, that the more he wished to be punished in this way, so much more benign was the Lord, and the more generously he lavished his treasures from his infinite freedom. With that, he said that he believed that there is no person in the world in whom these two things coincided as much as in him: how much he failed God, and received all and many continuous graces from his hand.”13

Ignatius, describing his experience of mercy in these comparative terms – the more he failed the Lord, the more the Lord reached out in giving him his grace – released the life-giving power of mercy which we, many times, dilute with our abstract formulations and legalistic conditions. The Lord who looks at us with mercy and chooses us, sends us out to bring with all its effectiveness, that same mercy to the poorest, to sinners, to those discarded people, and those crucified in the present world, who suffer injustice and violence. Only if we experience this healing power first-hand in our own wounds, as people and as a body, will we lose the fear of allowing ourselves be moved by the immense suffering of our brothers and sisters, and will we hasten to walk patiently with our people, learning from them the best way of helping and serving them. (cf. GC 32, d.4 n.50)

3.- Doing good led by the good spirit, thinking with the Church

We can always take a step forward in doing good in the Good Spirit, sentire cum ecclesia, as Ignatius says. The way we do things in using discernment is also proper to the Society. Faber used to formulate it asking for the grace that “everything good would be realised, thought or organised, be done through the good spirit and not through the bad.”14 This grace of discernment, it’s not enough to think, do or organise the good, but do it of the good spirit, is what roots us in the Church, in which the Spirit works and distributes the diverse charisms for the common good. Faber used to say that, in many things, those who wanted to reform the Church were right, but that God did not want to correct it through their means.

It is proper of the Society to do things thinking with the Church. Doing this without losing peace and with joy, in the context of the sins we see, in us as well as in others, and in the structures that we have created, involves carrying the cross, experiencing poverty and humiliations, where Ignatius encourages us to choose between bearing them patiently or desiring them.15 Where the contradiction was very clear, Ignatius used to advise to recollect oneself, before talking or acting, in order to work in the Good Spirit. We do not read the rules for thinking with the Church as precise instructions about controversial points (some rules could be out of date), but examples where Ignatius was inviting in his times to “act against” the anti-ecclesial spirit, inclining ourselves totally and decisively towards our Mother, the Church, not in order to justify a debatable position, but to open space so that the spirit could act in its own time.

Service of the good spirit and of discernment makes us men of the Church – not clericalists, but ecclesiastics – men “for others,” with nothing of our own which cuts us off from others, but rather everything that is ours placed in common and for service.

We neither walk alone nor comfortably, but we walk with “a heart that does not rest, that does not close in on itself but beats to the rhythm of a journey undertaken together with all the people faithful to God.”16 We walk becoming all things to all people, with the goal of helping others.

This self-emptying makes the Society have and always able to have more the face, the accent and the lifestyle of all peoples, of every culture, inserting ourselves in all of them, in the very heart of every people, to become the church, there with every people, inculturating the gospel and evangelising every culture.

In a filial colloquy, or as a servant to his Mistress, we beg Our Lady of la Strada to intercede for us before the “Father of mercies and God of all consolation” (2 Cor 1:3), to constantly place us with her Son, with Jesus who carries, and invites us to carry the cross of the world with Him. We entrust to Her “our way of proceeding” that it should be ecclesial, inculturated, poor, attentive, free from all worldly ambition. We beg Our Mother to direct and accompany every Jesuit along with that part of the people faithful to God whom he has been sent, along these paths of consolation, of compassion and discernment.

Source

Full Transcript of President Obama's Speech at Dallas Police Memorial

By Noah Fitzgerel
More from Noah

Jul 12, 2016, 5:05 PM ET

Star





Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty ImagesWATCH Obama Says US 'Not as Divided as We Seem' at Dallas Memorial



President Obama delivered a speech today in Dallas mourning the death of the five police officers killed in action while protecting peaceful protests in the city.

The remarks came days after the shooting in Dallas, where police said a gunman was targeting whites, and the deaths of two black men during police-involved shootings -- events that have left the nation on edge.

Here's a transcript of President Obama's remarks from the White House:

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. President and Mrs. Bush; my friend, the Vice President, and Dr. Biden; Mayor Rawlings; Chief Spiller; clergy; members of Congress; Chief Brown -- I’m so glad I met Michelle first, because she loves Stevie Wonder -- (laughter and applause) -- but most of all, to the families and friends and colleagues and fellow officers:

Scripture tells us that in our sufferings there is glory, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. Sometimes the truths of these words are hard to see. Right now, those words test us. Because the people of Dallas, people across the country, are suffering.

We’re here to honor the memory, and mourn the loss, of five fellow Americans -- to grieve with their loved ones, to support this community, to pray for the wounded, and to try and find some meaning amidst our sorrow.

For the men and women who protect and serve the people of Dallas, last Thursday began like any other day. Like most Americans each day, you get up, probably have too quick a breakfast, kiss your family goodbye, and you head to work. But your work, and the work of police officers across the country, is like no other. For the moment you put on that uniform, you have answered a call that at any moment, even in the briefest interaction, may put your life in harm’s way.