#parents were catholic but their father was moderate on the reformation

[rillabrooke]

i think i've mentioned before how i love playing the game "find the cleves family" where, no matter where you start on wikipedia, you can (almost always) trace back to anne of cleves or her brother william.

i have now extended the game to journal articles. today's article is on the origins of renaissance european witchcraft, and it mentions a dude in duke william v's (anne of cleves' brother) employ who was one of the biggest critics of witch-hunting. didn't even have to go down the rabbit hole to find that one 🤷🏻‍♀️

[minervacasterly]

The Death of Queen Elizabeth I of England and Ireland & the End of an era:

The last Tudor monarch died at Richmond Palace at the age of sixty nine on the 24th of March 1603 after ruling England for forty four years.

She was the longest Tudor reigning monarch, and third longest ruling Queen in English history. Elizabeth I was the daughter of Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII. Born on September 7th 1533, she was bastardized three years later following her parents’ annulment and her mother’s execution.

Out of all the monarchs, Elizabeth was unique in the sense that she never married. By refusing any marriage offer –while coyly entertaining every ambassador, making all sorts of promises that she would consider- she abstained herself from such troubles and was able to be her own mistress.

News of the Queen’s death spread like wildfire, also reaching her councilors’ preferred successor, James VI of Scotland. Weeks before on March 9th, Robert Cecil, son of her late and most trusted adviser William Cecil (Lord Burghley), wrote to George Nicholson, the English ambassador in Edinburgh, informing him that the Queen was ailing and that “her mouth and tongue” were “dry and her chest hot” and that she couldn’t sleep anymore. This is somewhat false. Elizabeth was deathly ill but she was far from helpless as Cecil’s report suggests. She was about her business, walking back and forth in her chambers, pondering on the future that awaited her country once she was gone.

Less than a week later, her condition worsened and she was no longer able to move as freely. Then on the 19th of March she gave a last audience to Sir Robert Carey (Mary Boleyn’s youngest grandson). She held Carey’s hand and confessed to him that she was not well. Sir Robert tried to cheer her up but to no avail. Elizabeth, as the rest, knew that her days were numbered and she wouldn’t live for another week.

On Tuesday, the twenty second she was brought to her bed where she stayed until her death. Her councilors visited her, insisting that she dictate her will so she could leave a successor but she refused. Like before, Elizabeth was always hesitant when it came to the issue of an heir. So many had competed for that position and so many were now gone.

Katherine Grey had married without permission and died nearly half mad in 1568, and ten years later her younger sister Mary Grey -who wasn’t allowed to see her husband because Elizabeth feared she could also produce children and rival claimants- and lastly, Mary, Queen of Scots who lost her head in 1587.

The favorite on everyone’s mind was James VI and one simple word from their queen’s mouth would give his claim even more validity but the Queen, probably not caring or in agony, remained adamant in her position. A story later circulated that Elizabeth I had indeed named James by way of her fingers when the council asked her to move her finger a certain way to mean that James was her successor and she did, but this cannot be corroborated and it is likely false.

The death of Elizabeth I marked the end of an era. A bloody, tumultuous era packed with religious and social change. She was not a staunch Protestant but she did push for Protestant reformer on the Church, primarily on the Book of Common prayer, and neither was she a Catholic –though one Pope expressed admiration for her, claiming that if she wasn’t a Protestant, he would support her instead of Philip II of Spain. Elizabeth was a moderate and she took a moderate approach. That is the type of monarch she was. Her laws were just as fierce, if not fiercer in some aspects, than her father’s, grandfather’s and siblings. The way in which she used her image says a lot about her. In one painting she is standing next to the goddess but if one looks closely it is the goddesses who are standing next to her, leading her to her destiny. Elizabeth was in popular eyes not just an anointed sovereign, but the head of all spiritual and earthly matters.

Read more here: https://tudorsandotherhistories.wordpress.com/2016/03/24/the-death-of-queen-elizabeth-i/

[dailytudors]

24 MARCH 1603: The Death of Queen Elizabeth I.

The last Tudor monarch died at Richmond Palace at the age of sixty nine after ruling England for forty four years. She was the longest Tudor reigning monarch, and third longest ruling Queen in English history. Elizabeth I was the daughter of Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII. Born on September 7th 1533, she was bastardized three years later following her parents’ annulment and her mother’s execution.

Out of all the monarchs, Elizabeth was unique in the sense that she never married. By refusing any marriage offer –while coyly entertaining every ambassador, making all sorts of promises that she would consider- she abstained herself from such troubles and was able to be her own mistress.

News of the Queen’s death spread like wildfire, also reaching her councilors’ preferred successor, James VI of Scotland. Weeks before on March 9th, Robert Cecil, son of her late and most trusted adviser William Cecil (Lord Burghley), wrote to George Nicholson, the English ambassador in Edinburgh, informing him that the Queen was ailing and that “her mouth and tongue” were “dry and her chest hot” and that she couldn’t sleep anymore. This is somewhat false. Elizabeth was deathly ill but she was far from helpless as Cecil’s report suggests. She was about her business, walking back and forth in her chambers, pondering on the future that awaited her country once she was gone.

Less than a week later, her condition worsened and she was no longer able to move as freely. Then on the 19th of March she gave a last audience to Sir Robert Carey (Mary Boleyn’s youngest grandson). She held Carey’s hand and confessed to him that she was not well. Sir Robert tried to cheer her up but to no avail. Elizabeth, as the rest, knew that her days were numbered and she wouldn’t live for another week.

On Tuesday, the twenty second she was brought to her bed where she stayed until her death. Her councilors visited her, insisting that she dictate her will so she could leave a successor but she refused. Like before, Elizabeth was always hesitant when it came to the issue of an heir. So many had competed for that position and so many were now gone.

Katherine Grey had married without permission and died nearly half mad in 1568, and ten years later her younger sister Mary Grey -who wasn’t allowed to see her husband because Elizabeth feared she could also produce children and rival claimants- and lastly, Mary, Queen of Scots who lost her head in 1587.

The favorite on everyone’s mind was James VI and one simple word from their queen’s mouth would give his claim even more validity but the Queen, probably not caring or in agony, remained adamant in her position. A story later circulated that Elizabeth I had indeed named James by way of her fingers when the council asked her to move her finger a certain way to mean that James was her successor and she did, but this cannot be corroborated and it is likely false.

The death of Elizabeth I marked the end of an era. A bloody, tumultuous era packed with religious and social change. She was not a staunch Protestant but she did push for Protestant reformer on the Church, primarily on the Book of Common prayer, and neither was she a Catholic –though one Pope expressed admiration for her, claiming that if she wasn’t a Protestant, he would support her instead of Philip II of Spain. Elizabeth was a moderate and she took a moderate approach. That is the type of monarch she was. Her laws were just as fierce, if not fiercer in some aspects, than her father’s, grandfather’s and siblings. The way in which she used her image says a lot about her. In one painting she is standing next to the goddess but if one looks closely it is the goddesses who are standing next to her, leading her to her destiny. Elizabeth was in popular eyes not just an anointed sovereign, but the head of all spiritual and earthly matters.

Read more here: https://tudorsandotherhistories.wordpress.com/2016/03/24/the-death-of-queen-elizabeth-i/

[lucile-desmoulins]

The Event of the Year

The wedding of Camille and Lucile on Christmas Eve 1790 was reminiscent of a modern day celebrity palooza.[1] As the daughter of a wealthy Parisian family and the new found orator of the revolution tied the knot, their guest list, chosen witnesses and decisions regarding religion were all elements worthy of a gossip column, or double page spread in a magazine. Their guest list included the notable Parisian revolutionaries of the time: Sillery, Mercier, Jerome Petion and Brissot de Warville.[2] Nevertheless, they were all stood up by the attendance of Maximilian de Robespierre: not only best friend of the groom, but also the signatory witness of the union.[3]

The wedding was also a political talking point; religion was a discursive focus for France at the time, this particular event occurring in the midst of the double pronged approach to reform the Church, known as the Civil Constitution of the Clergy.  

Thus, Robespierre and Camille’s attendance and participation to such an event was a political statement. Since the Enlightenment and publishing of the encyclopedie, there had been fervent calls to disband the Clergy and all of the exploitative despotism which accompanied it.[4] Like Lucile, Camille and Robespierre had likened to the works of Rousseau, who had moderate ideas for religious reform in comparison to many of his intellectual peers.[5] Therefore, at the request of Lucile’s traditionalist parents, a religious wedding took place.

Unfortunately for him, Camille was not in high favour with the Church due to some outspoken criticism of Clergy behaviour published within his newspaper. At the mercy of the Curé of St. Sulpice, Camille was required to compose a public profession of his Catholic faith and both he and Lucile were to attend a confession.[6] Whilst they did indeed both attend a Catholic confession, Camille never did complete a public admittance of Catholicism, remaining true to his word of never proclaiming something he didn’t believe in.[7]

And so they did wed, Lucile in a pink satin gown and silk garter embroidered with forget-me-nots and the words Unisson-nous-pour-la-vie.[8] It turned out to be a very emotional event. Dictated to his father, Camille would write that he and Lucile both wept, with many guests also shedding a tear at various durations throughout the ceremony.[9] Lucile’s future was never to be boring again: her marriage to Camille meant that she was privy to some of the most important, private conversations between members of the Cordeliers Club, and later the National Assembly, and later still the Dantonists. Faithfully, she would remain Camille’s biggest support and sounding board for Camille’s most radical ideas and publications. Evidently, the emotion showed within this wedding demonstrates that Lucile’s devotion to the revolutionary cause was deeply intertwined with her devotion to her husband.

[1] Methley, 125-127.

[2] Ibid, 128.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Charles A. Gliozzo, “The Philosophes and Religion: Intellectual Origins of the Dechristianization Movement in the French Revolution,” Church History, vol. 40, no. 3 (1971): 273.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Methley, Camille Desmoulins, 126.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid, 128.

[9] Camille to Jean Benoît Nicolas Desmoulins, 24 December 1790, found within Violet Methley, Camille Desmoulins; A Biography (London: Martin Secker, 1914), 127.

[adventism-atheism-orthodoxy-me]

The comments section blew up when I posted my initial comment.  In an effort to synthesize my thoughts, be a bit more clear, and to add things that I maybe wish I had in hindsight, I’m posting this here, with my thoughts put together, hopefully more coherently.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As an adult, I got fed up with the “me too” sameness of mainstream Protestantism. It worshiped a demonic god, and the theology didn’t make sense.

As I was studying, what I felt, to be the linchpin of the Reformation – Indulgences – it was an off phrase that caught my attention and directed my gaze eastward.

Something like, “because of the unique soteriology of the Eastern Orthodox Church, indulgences, as practiced by the Roman Catholic Church, never gained ground”, or something to that effect.  Notice that it didn’t say that the Eastern Orthodox Church hadn’t done indulgences - full stop.  It implied that it had been tried, but that it was an innovation that was cast aside as unworthy of the Church.  Further reading supported that. 

Protestantism was a predictable response to bad, wayward theology. It was only after the Reformation could no longer be contained that the real reforms took place.  But the learned suppositions read into Anselm and Augustine underlying the practice of indulgences never disappeared.  The Latin Church just "counter-reformed”, continuing down the path of modernity with their progeny.  It was only with the humanist counter-reformers, that indulgences over time became less onerous - not because they weren't Biblical, but because they weren't fashionable.

History still records a Spanish Inquisition though.  The Latin Church never repented, never did rejoin the ecumenical church.

So, what about the Authority ascribed to the Latin Church?  It’s both western and includes the apostolic authority of the Petrine ministry, not to mention it is the See of Saints Peter and Paul.

Well, I come from a form of Protestantism that sees itself as the continuation of the Reformation against both the Latin Church, and the "Apostate Protestants". There was never a moment that I was ever going to consider the Latin Church as anything other than the, so called, "Beast of Revelation".

It is only after immersing myself in Eastern Orthodoxy, that I could even consider the claims of Patristic Authority, and that discussion has been going on between the Latins and the Orthodox since the schism. Others more versed in the subject could probably do a much better job of arguing these points than I would be.

I would only say this.  When Christ came to earth, he came first to his own people who rejected him.  They were the ones with authority.  They were the children of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob.  Heirs to the promises of God.  His chosen people, with a chosen priesthood, and the scribes and Pharisees dedicating their lives to pleasing him.  When he spoke with them, his words were, "You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean."  The Forerunner called them, "A brood of vipers".  Authority only exists as long as it’s faithful to it’s mandate.  Christians were adopted into God's family because Israel, with the mandate and the promise, abandoned him.  Yet his promises continue through a different line, transferred from the unworthy, to the worthy.  "The Gates of Hell shall not prevail".

For myself, I have chosen to ignore claims to authority.  For it has been said, "By their Fruits, you shall know them".

To be clear, the hard line my denomination took towards the Latin Church was something that gave me a great deal of pause, and it was always clear that it was the institution and not the people - even priests were to be respected.  The charge was against, "the Papacy", which, even itself isn't exactly the best distinction, and I don't think anyone would suggest being impolite to the Pope, just because they could be.  It was understood that there would be more Catholics in Heaven than anyone else because of their historical weight, and the piety of individual congregants.

My thinking is Adventism itself has moderated it's views over the years.  You certainly won't see the blanket statements published now that you would have 30 years ago.  Ironically, this is one of the things that bothered me about it, not really that they moderated their views towards the Papacy specifically, but rather that it would moderate itself so thoroughly on a subject that was supposed to be a distinguishing factor to our identity.

My Grandma converted from the Latin Church to the Adventist Church before my father was even born, its influence in hindsight was pervasive.  Religious "artwork" all over the walls, hot cross buns on Easter, She and my father both had long prayer rules....  This was part of my upbringing, and in hindsight, I missed the subtle presence of it after she died.

Latin Church writers though were to be mistrusted.  J.R.R. Tolkein, for instance, was not approved of.  It was only through his fiction in the Lord of the Rings that he began to gain ground in his more serious work as a Christian writer worth reading.

So even though I had no idea as to whether or not the Latin Church was actually what my denomination might claim it to be, I did know that, based only on indulgences, I would never consider it.  I didn't have any options until I discovered the Ontological model found in the Ecumenical Orthodox Church.

The Ecumenical Orthodox Church, with its history of continuous faith amidst severe persecution, the absence of significant schisms except against heretics as defined by collegial ecumenical councils and the Latins, it’s continuation in spite of its lack of a single authoritarian head, its preservation of certain distinctives, its practice of theologoumenon to a much larger set of ideas and practices, and its oversight in the commentaries of the West when discussing ecclesial failure that gave rise to the Reformation, give it the opening I never would have given to the Latin Church.

I checked the books.  There was no commentary on the Great Schism as odd as that may sound, no commentary on anything outside of the struggle of the plucky little protestants against the "Evil Empire" of Rome.

The bottom line is this. I have no opinion other than I see the Orthodox as having preserved true Ontological Theology since the time of the apostles.  Again, "By their Fruits, you shall know them"!

The icing on the cake is this, when I seriously stated digging into Orthodoxy, I found enough trappings familiar to the Latin West that I really had to get a handle on the Ontology before I could see it making sense.  Further, As much as I was having difficulty, my fellow Adventist travelers were having even greater issues.  They are steeped in Penal Substitution Atonement Theory; they don't know about the Great Schism; they don't know the difference between the Latin Church and the Ecumenical Orthodox Church.  They are ignorant.

Their concern?

I was becoming Catholic.

I’m still a catechumen and still attend an Adventist church with my wife, our kids, and our parents. I need not belabor the reasons for this in this discussion – they have to do with everything I've just discussed, as well as church politics, family politics, and God’s providence. But just because I’ve found and embraced the Ontological model, doesn’t mean that I am yet fully Orthodox. I am still Healing the Tragic Soul of the Modern West in my soul.

[thelahorepost-blog]

Melania Trump 'hates to see children separated from their families'

Democratic lawmakers joined protesters outside immigration detention facilities in New Jersey and Texas on Sunday for Father’s Day demonstrations against the Trump administration’s practice of separating children from their parents at the US-Mexico border. “This must not be who we are as a nation,” said Representative Jerrold Nadler, one of seven members of Congress from New York and New Jersey who met with five detainees inside a facility in Elizabeth, New Jersey, including three who said they had young relatives removed from their care after seeking asylum at the border. The events came as news stories highlighting the family separations intensified political pressure on the White House, even from some of President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans. US officials said on Friday that nearly 2,000 children were separated from adults at the border between mid-April and the end of May. In May, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a “zero tolerance” policy in which all those apprehended entering the United States illegally, including those seeking asylum, would be criminally charged, which generally leads to children being separated from their parents. Administration officials have defended the tactic as necessary to secure the border and suggested it would act as a deterrent to illegal immigration. But the policy has drawn condemnation from medical professionals, religious leaders and immigration activists, who warn that some children could suffer lasting psychological trauma. The children are held in government facilities, released to adult sponsors or placed in temporary foster care. In South Texas on Sunday, several Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Jeff Merkley, visited a Border Patrol Processing Center in McAllen to call attention to the policy, while Representative Beto O’Rourke, who is running for the US Senate in Texas, led a protest march to a temporary detention facility for immigrant children set up near El Paso. O’Rourke told the demonstrators they had to bear the burden of “what we now know to be happening.” “I want that burden to be so uncomfortable for so many of us that it forces us to act, it places the public pressure on those in positions of public trust and power to do the right thing for our country,” O’Rourke, who is seeking to unseat Republican Senator Ted Cruz, said to applause. Some moderate Republicans have also called on Trump to stop the separations. Senators Susan Collins and Jeff Flake wrote to White House officials on Saturday seeking more information on the policy. “It is inconsistent with our American values to separate these children from their parents,” Collins said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday. Trump has sought to blame Democrats, saying their support for passage of a broader immigration bill would end the separations. White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday: “As a mother, as a Catholic, as somebody who has got a conscience. … I will tell you that nobody likes this policy.” “You saw the president (say) on camera that he wants this to end,” she added. A spokeswoman for Melania Trump told CNN on Sunday that the first lady “hates to see children separated from their families” and hopes lawmakers from both parties can agree on immigration reform. In an opinion piece in the Washington Post, former first lady Laura Bush, wife of the previous Republican president, George W Bush, said she lives in a border state and appreciates the need to enforce and protect the US borders. “But this zero-tolerance policy is cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my heart,” Bush wrote, adding the images were “eerily reminiscent of the Japanese American internment camps of World War II, now considered to have been one of the most shameful episodes in US history.” Democrats have accused the president of effectively turning the children into political hostages to secure stricter immigration measures, such as funding for a US-Mexico border wall. “Stop lying to the American people. This is your policy,” Democratic US Representative Hakeem Jeffries said in New Jersey. Democrats in the US House of Representatives will introduce legislation this week aimed at stopping separations, mirroring a similar Senate bill sponsored by Democrat Dianne Feinstein. But neither bill has much hope of securing enough support in the Republican-controlled Congress, let alone surviving Trump’s veto pen. Roy Garcia, 43, attended the New Jersey protest with his wife, Linda, and their sons, 8-year-old Julian and 11-year-old Sebastian. “It’s hard for me to enjoy Father’s Day knowing what’s happening to other children and families,” he said. “It’s heartbreaking.” Read the full article

[dani-qrt]

Democrats, activists rally against Trump

ELIZABETH, N.J. (Reuters) – Democratic lawmakers joined hundreds of protesters outside an immigration detention facility in New Jersey on Sunday for a Father’s Day demonstration against the Trump administration’s practice of separating children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border.

“This must not be who we are as a nation,” said Representative Jerrold Nadler, one of seven members of Congress from New York and New Jersey who met with five detainees inside the facility, including three who said they had young relatives removed from their care after seeking asylum at the border.

The event in the city of Elizabeth came as news stories highlighting the family separations intensified political pressure on the White House, even from some of President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans.

U.S. officials said on Friday that nearly 2,000 children were separated from adults at the border between mid-April and the end of May.

In May, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a “zero tolerance” policy in which all those apprehended entering the United States illegally, including those seeking asylum, would be criminally charged, which generally leads to children being separated from their parents.

Administration officials have defended the tactic as necessary to secure the border and suggested it would act as a deterrent to illegal immigration.

But the policy has drawn condemnation from medical professionals, religious leaders and immigration activists, who warn that some children could suffer lasting psychological trauma. The children are held in government facilities, released to adult sponsors or placed in temporary foster care.

In South Texas on Sunday, several Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Jeff Merkley, visited a Border Patrol Processing Center in McAllen to call attention to the policy, while Representative Beto O’Rourke, who is running for the U.S. Senate in Texas, led a protest march to a temporary detention facility for immigrant children set up near El Paso.

“There is an open question about who we are as Americans,” O’Rourke told the demonstrators, adding they had to bear the burden of “what we now know to be happening.”

“I want that burden to be so uncomfortable for so many of us that it forces us to act, it places the public pressure on those in positions of public trust and power to do the right thing for our country,” O’Rourke, who is seeking to unseat Republican Senator Ted Cruz, said to applause.

Some moderate Republicans have also called on Trump to stop the separations. Senators Susan Collins and Jeff Flake wrote to White House officials on Saturday seeking more information on the policy.

“It is inconsistent with our American values to separate these children from their parents,” Collins said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

People participate in a protest against recent U.S. immigration policy of separating children from their families when they enter the United States as undocumented immigrants, in front of a Homeland Security facility in Elizabeth, NJ, U.S., June 17, 2018. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith

‘STOP LYING’

Trump has sought to blame Democrats, saying their support for passage of a broader immigration bill would end the separations.

White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday: “As a mother, as a Catholic, as somebody who has got a conscience. … I will tell you that nobody likes this policy.”

“You saw the president (say) on camera that he wants this to end,” she added.

A spokeswoman for Melania Trump told CNN on Sunday that the first lady “hates to see children separated from their families” and hopes lawmakers from both parties can agree on immigration reform, in what was a rare public statement on a policy issue from the president’s wife. Her “Be Best” platform, unveiled in May, is dedicated to children’s well-being.

Democrats have accused the president of effectively turning the children into political hostages to secure stricter immigration measures, such as funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

“Stop lying to the American people. This is your policy,” Democratic U.S. Representative Hakeem Jeffries said in New Jersey.

The lawmakers in Elizabeth waited about 90 minutes to gain access to the detention facility, which is operated for the U.S. government by a private contractor.

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives will introduce legislation this week aimed at stopping separations, mirroring a similar Senate bill sponsored by Democrat Dianne Feinstein. But neither bill has much hope of securing enough support in the Republican-controlled Congress, let alone surviving Trump’s veto pen.

Roy Garcia, 43, attended the protest with his wife, Linda, and their sons, 8-year-old Julian and 11-year-old Sebastian.

Slideshow (13 Images)

“It’s hard for me to enjoy Father’s Day knowing what’s happening to other children and families,” he said. “It’s heartbreaking.”

Reporting by Joseph Ax; Additional reporting by Lindsay Dunsmuir and Valerie Volcovici in Washington; Editing by Daniel Wallis and Peter Cooney

The post Democrats, activists rally against Trump appeared first on World The News.

from World The News https://ift.tt/2lgW3I8 via Online News

[newestbalance]

Democrats, activists rally against Trump

ELIZABETH, N.J. (Reuters) – Democratic lawmakers joined hundreds of protesters outside an immigration detention facility in New Jersey on Sunday for a Father’s Day demonstration against the Trump administration’s practice of separating children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border.

“This must not be who we are as a nation,” said Representative Jerrold Nadler, one of seven members of Congress from New York and New Jersey who met with five detainees inside the facility, including three who said they had young relatives removed from their care after seeking asylum at the border.

The event in the city of Elizabeth came as news stories highlighting the family separations intensified political pressure on the White House, even from some of President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans.

U.S. officials said on Friday that nearly 2,000 children were separated from adults at the border between mid-April and the end of May.

In May, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a “zero tolerance” policy in which all those apprehended entering the United States illegally, including those seeking asylum, would be criminally charged, which generally leads to children being separated from their parents.

Administration officials have defended the tactic as necessary to secure the border and suggested it would act as a deterrent to illegal immigration.

But the policy has drawn condemnation from medical professionals, religious leaders and immigration activists, who warn that some children could suffer lasting psychological trauma. The children are held in government facilities, released to adult sponsors or placed in temporary foster care.

In South Texas on Sunday, several Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Jeff Merkley, visited a Border Patrol Processing Center in McAllen to call attention to the policy, while Representative Beto O’Rourke, who is running for the U.S. Senate in Texas, led a protest march to a temporary detention facility for immigrant children set up near El Paso.

“There is an open question about who we are as Americans,” O’Rourke told the demonstrators, adding they had to bear the burden of “what we now know to be happening.”

“I want that burden to be so uncomfortable for so many of us that it forces us to act, it places the public pressure on those in positions of public trust and power to do the right thing for our country,” O’Rourke, who is seeking to unseat Republican Senator Ted Cruz, said to applause.

Some moderate Republicans have also called on Trump to stop the separations. Senators Susan Collins and Jeff Flake wrote to White House officials on Saturday seeking more information on the policy.

“It is inconsistent with our American values to separate these children from their parents,” Collins said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

People participate in a protest against recent U.S. immigration policy of separating children from their families when they enter the United States as undocumented immigrants, in front of a Homeland Security facility in Elizabeth, NJ, U.S., June 17, 2018. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith

‘STOP LYING’

Trump has sought to blame Democrats, saying their support for passage of a broader immigration bill would end the separations.

White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday: “As a mother, as a Catholic, as somebody who has got a conscience. … I will tell you that nobody likes this policy.”

“You saw the president (say) on camera that he wants this to end,” she added.

A spokeswoman for Melania Trump told CNN on Sunday that the first lady “hates to see children separated from their families” and hopes lawmakers from both parties can agree on immigration reform, in what was a rare public statement on a policy issue from the president’s wife. Her “Be Best” platform, unveiled in May, is dedicated to children’s well-being.

Democrats have accused the president of effectively turning the children into political hostages to secure stricter immigration measures, such as funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

“Stop lying to the American people. This is your policy,” Democratic U.S. Representative Hakeem Jeffries said in New Jersey.

The lawmakers in Elizabeth waited about 90 minutes to gain access to the detention facility, which is operated for the U.S. government by a private contractor.

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives will introduce legislation this week aimed at stopping separations, mirroring a similar Senate bill sponsored by Democrat Dianne Feinstein. But neither bill has much hope of securing enough support in the Republican-controlled Congress, let alone surviving Trump’s veto pen.

Roy Garcia, 43, attended the protest with his wife, Linda, and their sons, 8-year-old Julian and 11-year-old Sebastian.

Slideshow (13 Images)

“It’s hard for me to enjoy Father’s Day knowing what’s happening to other children and families,” he said. “It’s heartbreaking.”

Reporting by Joseph Ax; Additional reporting by Lindsay Dunsmuir and Valerie Volcovici in Washington; Editing by Daniel Wallis and Peter Cooney

The post Democrats, activists rally against Trump appeared first on World The News.

from World The News https://ift.tt/2lgW3I8 via Everyday News

[cleopatrarps]

Democrats, activists rally against Trump

ELIZABETH, N.J. (Reuters) – Democratic lawmakers joined hundreds of protesters outside an immigration detention facility in New Jersey on Sunday for a Father’s Day demonstration against the Trump administration’s practice of separating children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border.

“This must not be who we are as a nation,” said Representative Jerrold Nadler, one of seven members of Congress from New York and New Jersey who met with five detainees inside the facility, including three who said they had young relatives removed from their care after seeking asylum at the border.

The event in the city of Elizabeth came as news stories highlighting the family separations intensified political pressure on the White House, even from some of President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans.

U.S. officials said on Friday that nearly 2,000 children were separated from adults at the border between mid-April and the end of May.

In May, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a “zero tolerance” policy in which all those apprehended entering the United States illegally, including those seeking asylum, would be criminally charged, which generally leads to children being separated from their parents.

Administration officials have defended the tactic as necessary to secure the border and suggested it would act as a deterrent to illegal immigration.

But the policy has drawn condemnation from medical professionals, religious leaders and immigration activists, who warn that some children could suffer lasting psychological trauma. The children are held in government facilities, released to adult sponsors or placed in temporary foster care.

In South Texas on Sunday, several Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Jeff Merkley, visited a Border Patrol Processing Center in McAllen to call attention to the policy, while Representative Beto O’Rourke, who is running for the U.S. Senate in Texas, led a protest march to a temporary detention facility for immigrant children set up near El Paso.

“There is an open question about who we are as Americans,” O’Rourke told the demonstrators, adding they had to bear the burden of “what we now know to be happening.”

“I want that burden to be so uncomfortable for so many of us that it forces us to act, it places the public pressure on those in positions of public trust and power to do the right thing for our country,” O’Rourke, who is seeking to unseat Republican Senator Ted Cruz, said to applause.

Some moderate Republicans have also called on Trump to stop the separations. Senators Susan Collins and Jeff Flake wrote to White House officials on Saturday seeking more information on the policy.

“It is inconsistent with our American values to separate these children from their parents,” Collins said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

People participate in a protest against recent U.S. immigration policy of separating children from their families when they enter the United States as undocumented immigrants, in front of a Homeland Security facility in Elizabeth, NJ, U.S., June 17, 2018. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith

‘STOP LYING’

Trump has sought to blame Democrats, saying their support for passage of a broader immigration bill would end the separations.

White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday: “As a mother, as a Catholic, as somebody who has got a conscience. … I will tell you that nobody likes this policy.”

“You saw the president (say) on camera that he wants this to end,” she added.

A spokeswoman for Melania Trump told CNN on Sunday that the first lady “hates to see children separated from their families” and hopes lawmakers from both parties can agree on immigration reform, in what was a rare public statement on a policy issue from the president’s wife. Her “Be Best” platform, unveiled in May, is dedicated to children’s well-being.

Democrats have accused the president of effectively turning the children into political hostages to secure stricter immigration measures, such as funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

“Stop lying to the American people. This is your policy,” Democratic U.S. Representative Hakeem Jeffries said in New Jersey.

The lawmakers in Elizabeth waited about 90 minutes to gain access to the detention facility, which is operated for the U.S. government by a private contractor.

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives will introduce legislation this week aimed at stopping separations, mirroring a similar Senate bill sponsored by Democrat Dianne Feinstein. But neither bill has much hope of securing enough support in the Republican-controlled Congress, let alone surviving Trump’s veto pen.

Roy Garcia, 43, attended the protest with his wife, Linda, and their sons, 8-year-old Julian and 11-year-old Sebastian.

Slideshow (13 Images)

“It’s hard for me to enjoy Father’s Day knowing what’s happening to other children and families,” he said. “It’s heartbreaking.”

Reporting by Joseph Ax; Additional reporting by Lindsay Dunsmuir and Valerie Volcovici in Washington; Editing by Daniel Wallis and Peter Cooney

The post Democrats, activists rally against Trump appeared first on World The News.

from World The News https://ift.tt/2lgW3I8 via News of World

[minervacasterly]

THE DEATH OF QUEEN ELIZABETH I OF ENGLAND The last Tudor monarch died at Richmond Palace on the 24th of March 1603 at the age of sixty-nine, having ruled England for forty-four years. She was the longest Tudor reigning monarch, and third longest ruling Queen in English history. Elizabeth I was the daughter of Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII. Born on September 7th 1533, she was bastardized three years later following her parents’ annulment and her mother’s execution. Out of all the monarchs, Elizabeth was unique in the sense that she never married. By refusing any marriage offer –while coyly entertaining every ambassador, making all sorts of promises that she would consider- she abstained herself from such troubles and was able to be her own mistress. News of the Queen’s death spread like wildfire, also reaching her councilors’ preferred successor, James VI of Scotland. Weeks before on March 9th, Robert Cecil, son of her late and most trusted adviser William Cecil (Lord Burghley), wrote to George Nicholson, the English ambassador in Edinburgh, informing him that the Queen was ailing and that “her mouth and tongue” were “dry and her chest hot” and that she couldn’t sleep anymore. This is somewhat false. Elizabeth was deathly ill but she was far from helpless as Cecil’s report suggests. She was about her business, walking back and forth in her chambers, pondering on the future that awaited her country once she was gone. Less than a week later, her condition worsened and she was no longer able to move as freely. Then on the 19th of March she gave a last audience to Sir Robert Carey (Mary Boleyn’s youngest grandson). She held Carey’s hand and confessed to him that she was not well. Sir Robert tried to cheer her up but to no avail. Elizabeth, as the rest, knew that her days were numbered and she wouldn’t live for another week. On Tuesday, the twenty second she was brought to her bed where she stayed until her death. Her councilors visited her, insisting that she dictate her will so she could leave a successor but she refused. Like before, Elizabeth was always hesitant when it came to the issue of an heir. So many had competed for that position and so many were now gone. Katherine Grey had married without permission and died nearly half mad in 1568, and ten years later her younger sister Mary Grey -who wasn’t allowed to see her husband because Elizabeth feared she could also produce children and rival claimants- and lastly, Mary, Queen of Scots who lost her head in 1587. The favorite on everyone’s mind was James VI and one simple word from their queen’s mouth would give his claim even more validity but the Queen, probably not caring or in agony, remained adamant in her position. A story later circulated that Elizabeth I had indeed named James by way of her fingers when the council asked her to move her finger a certain way to mean that James was her successor and she did, but this cannot be corroborated and it is likely false. The death of Elizabeth I marked the end of an era. A bloody, tumultuous era packed with religious and social change. She was not a staunch Protestant but she did push for Protestant reformer on the Church, primarily on the Book of Common prayer, and neither was she a Catholic –though one Pope expressed admiration for her, claiming that if she wasn’t a Protestant, he would support her instead of Philip II of Spain. Elizabeth was a moderate and she took a moderate approach. That is the type of monarch she was. Her laws were just as fierce, if not fiercer in some aspects, than her father’s, grandfather’s and siblings. The way in which she used her image says a lot about her. In one painting she is standing next to the goddess but if one looks closely it is the goddesses who are standing next to her, leading her to her destiny. Elizabeth was in popular eyes not just an anointed sovereign, but the head of all spiritual and earthly matters. Read the rest here: https://tudorsandotherhistories.wordpress.com/2016/03/24/the-death-of-queen-elizabeth-i/

[democratsunited-blog]

Democrats, activists rally against Trump's family separation policy

https://uniteddemocrats.net/?p=3970

Democrats, activists rally against Trump's family separation policy

ELIZABETH, N.J. (Reuters) – Democratic lawmakers joined hundreds of protesters outside an immigration detention facility in New Jersey on Sunday for a Father’s Day demonstration against the Trump administration’s practice of separating children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border.

“This must not be who we are as a nation,” said Representative Jerrold Nadler, one of seven members of Congress from New York and New Jersey who met with five detainees inside the facility, including three who said they had young relatives removed from their care after seeking asylum at the border.

The event in the city of Elizabeth came as news stories highlighting the family separations intensified political pressure on the White House, even from some of President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans.

U.S. officials said on Friday that nearly 2,000 children were separated from adults at the border between mid-April and the end of May.

In May, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a “zero tolerance” policy in which all those apprehended entering the United States illegally, including those seeking asylum, would be criminally charged, which generally leads to children being separated from their parents.

The policy has drawn condemnation from medical professionals, religious leaders and immigration activists, who warn that some children could suffer lasting psychological trauma. The children are held in government facilities, released to adult sponsors or placed in temporary foster care.

In South Texas on Sunday, several Democratic lawmakers, including Senator Jeff Merkley, were due to tour detention facilities to call attention to the policy, while Representative Beto O’Rourke, who is running for the U.S. Senate in Texas, said he would march with protesters to the border.

“This is inhumane,” O’Rourke told CNN. “I’d like to say it’s un-American, but it’s happening right now in America.”

Some moderate Republicans have also called on Trump to stop the separations. Senators Susan Collins and Jeff Flake wrote to White House officials on Saturday seeking more information on the policy.

“It is inconsistent with our American values to separate these children from their parents,” Collins said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

People participate in a protest against recent U.S. immigration policy of separating children from their families when they enter the United States as undocumented immigrants, in front of a Homeland Security facility in Elizabeth, NJ, U.S., June 17, 2018. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith

‘STOP LYING’

Administration officials have defended the tactic as necessary to secure the border and suggested it would act as a deterrent to illegal immigration, while Trump has sought to blame Democrats, saying their support for passage of a broader immigration bill would end the separations.

“As a mother, as a Catholic, as somebody who has got a conscience. … I will tell you that nobody likes this policy,” White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. “You saw the president (say) on camera that he wants this to end.”

Democrats have accused Trump of effectively turning the children into political hostages to secure stricter immigration measures, such as funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

“Stop lying to the American people. This is your policy,” Democratic U.S. Representative Hakeem Jeffries said in New Jersey.

A spokeswoman for Melania Trump told CNN on Sunday that the first lady “hates to see children separated from their families” and hopes lawmakers from both parties can agree on immigration reform, in what was a rare public statement on a policy issue from the president’s wife. Her “Be Best” platform, unveiled in May, is dedicated to children’s well-being.

The lawmakers in Elizabeth waited about 90 minutes to gain access to the detention facility, which is operated for the U.S. government by a private contractor.

While the legislators stood inside a cramped waiting room filled with relatives of detainees, a television showed an interview with Steve Bannon, the former senior adviser to the president whose hardline views on immigration helped shape Trump’s presidential campaign and first months in office.

Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives will introduce legislation this week aimed at stopping separations, mirroring a similar Senate bill sponsored by Democrat Dianne Feinstein. But neither bill has much hope of securing enough support in the Republican-controlled Congress, let alone surviving Trump’s veto pen.

Roy Garcia, 43, attended the protest with his wife, Linda, and their sons, 8-year-old Julian and 11-year-old Sebastian.

Slideshow (13 Images)

“It’s hard for me to enjoy Father’s Day knowing what’s happening to other children and families,” he said. “It’s heartbreaking.”

Reporting by Joseph Ax; Additional reporting by Lindsay Dunsmuir and Valerie Volcovici in Washington; Editing by Daniel Wallis and Peter Cooney

Read full story here

[binachai]

A long road

A bit over a week ago my stepmother’s mother died. Long story short, it didn’t phase me. I haven’t heard from or received even a thanks for attending her husband’s funeral a few years ago or any of the cards/gifts I had sent years ago before giving up. It was like once I moved out of my parent’s house I did not exist any longer to any of my stepmother’s family; moving out happened 19 years ago. So, really, this woman hasn’t been a part of my life for nearly half of it. And being a stepgrandparent she wasn’t there for the first 8ish years either. All my memories of her are horrid and painful. 

But, family is important to me. And it is important to show up. So I traveled across the country to be there for the wake and catholic funeral. #awkward

None of my father’s side, whom I had not shared much (or any) of my Jewish conversion with, were phased when I spoke about it. I am not surprised, being that they are ignorant about it being a culture and more than just religion. It was nice to have it be a non issue, especially among the normal family drama that was moderately amplified due to the stress and pressures of death. 

Before I left GA for MA, I had looked up shuls, even asking my rabbi for suggestions. I attended a lovely Reform shul  for Shabbat that had a wonderful bunch of people. A shout out to Brice (Bruce?) and Virginia. I was shocked at the level of emotion I had during service, that when we got to the mourner’s kaddish something inside of me broke. I couldn’t see due to the sea of tears streaming. I was able to pull myself together by the end of motzi. 

It’s been rough since that dam broke inside of me and I am confused as hell about it. 

My poor rabbi. I still attend the conversion class because the dynamic constantly changes and new things are unearthed even if I have heard that topic before. That and I like to support my friends that attend it. I forget why but rabbi was discussing the parts of the Shabbat service (discussing the similarities and slight differences between streams) and when he mentioned the mourner’s kaddish I started to get weepy again. Poor rabbi was confused and concerned. Had he just let it be and moved on I would have been ok, but he didn’t and I just couldn’t hold back the tears. Luckily everyone understood and were supportive. 

So in case anyone was concerned about my disappearance, that is why. It might take a bit to get back in the swing of things. Especially since work has a policy of 3 days of bereavement but I was only allowed one - and had to work on Sunday - and as of today (Tuesday) have roughly 30 billable hours worked. Life is busy and a mess lately. With a dash of zomg emotions. My bf has tried but he just doesn’t seem capable of being supportive. I know he cares, but despite my telling him what I need, he isn’t providing it; which opens up flood gates to other realms of emotions and internal strife.