Don Edwards Literary Memorial
Compiled and Published by LeRoy Chatfield

Archive for May, 2010

THANK YOU MAIL . . .

Monday, May 31st, 2010

As a young teaching religious brother in a Catholic high school in the late 1950s, I made up my mind never to expect gratitude –  even a thank you – for my efforts, and I have not been disappointed.

A teacher (or an organizer) could live a couple of lifetimes and never receive a thank you, or even an acknowledgement,  from those who benefited from the dedication and hard work – not a complaint, just one of life’s realities.

However, when an unexpected expression of gratitude does float by,  grab it! You are not likely to see another.  

(With permission), here is a response to my thank you note for a contribution made to my Farmworker Movement Documentation Project.

“LeRoy,

It means a lot to me too.

Look at what my life is and has been all of these years.

* I was part of the team that made the decision to have AARP file an amicus court brief that stopped the state of California from kicking hundreds of thousands of people off of their Medicaid. We were part of the winning side on that.

* I was part of the team nationally that organized the campaign to stop the privatization of Social Security.  From the late 1990’s through 2005 dozens of us within my organization worked on the issue briefs, the campaign themes, the basic organizing that made this successful campaign a reality.   We were able to move people, resources, political messages that framed the strategy that won that fight.

I can name a thousand other political efforts, campaigns, issues that helped specific people as well as big ideas that I have had the honor and opportunity to be part of, to lead, to organize, to contribute to and build.

Sorry to be so corny but I owe you. Every Monday morning you talked to all of us about Cesar, fighting for the poor, winning justice. I listened to every word and every message and every lesson, both ideological and technical that you gave that room full of activists. I learned discipline, organizing, political analysis and the science and art of change.

So, I chose this life and you taught me, you and Chris, what to do and how to do it. And, on a personal note, through all of this and all of the memories and work and sacrifices, I am a very happy person. Not many people can say they were able to be part of their dream. I can and I am not even near finished doing so.

No, LeRoy, I thank you,

Ernie

SUBMISSION DEADLINE for “Syndic” Literary Journal

Thursday, May 27th, 2010

I have decided to revive the Syndic literary journal from the 1960s.  In keeping with the times, the journal will be published online,  not in hard copy. The original Syndic was a publishing platform for high school students, the revived Syndic is open to all who submit their creative work for consideration.

The submission deadline is: Friday, July 16, 2010.

Here is a list of the kinds of creative work I wish to publish in the August 2010 issue of  Syndic:

1. Art work – with title and caption or short commentary
2. Photographs – with caption or short commentary
3. Poetry
4. Short Stories
5. Non-Fiction Essays – commentary, true story, criticism, advocacy, etc.
6. Cartoons, Political Cartoons, or Caricatures – with caption
7. Reviews – books, movies, theatre, concerts, events, other
8.  Song /Speech –  recording in MP3 format.

 Other – Items 1 to 8 are offered as suggestions. Any submission appropriate for a literary journal is welcome.

Criteria for Publication: Consideration for publication will include the following guidelines: creative, interesting, thoughtful, well-presented, authentic, insightful, and appropriate for a literary journal.

Submission of material comes with the explicit understanding the work is solely that of the author and not plagiarized.

Please submit items to: Syndic@leroychatfield.us

Question?/Clarification? – Email: syndic@leroychatfield.us

(FOR HISTORY/BACKGROUND ABOUT  ORIGINAL Syndic, PLEASE READ NEXT POST: “Syndic” Revisited)

“Syndic” Revisited

Monday, May 24th, 2010

 I was nuts!

Fifty years ago, I published a literary magazine named, “Syndic”. Twenty-six years-old, an English teacher at a Catholic high school in San Francisco, and I got the bright idea to start a literary journal for high school students. What was I thinking?

Consider this recipe:  / 1960s / San Francisco / City Lights Bookstore / North Beach / Ferlingetti / KPFA Berkeley / Art Hoppe / Black Hawk Jazz Club / Fillmore District / St. Elijah’s Catholic Worker  Oakland / –  combine all ingredients, shake well, garnish with some Ammon Hennacy, and serve.

Why the name “Syndic”?  I wanted a greek word, classical sounding, something short, punchy, and a little mysterious sounding. One of its dictionery meanings is: an agent of a university or corporation. I was neither, but it was  close enough to  fit  my idea of what a literary magazine for working class high school students should be named, and besides, no one would know what it meant anyway!

A half-century later, I am hazy on many details, but my recollection is I published at least four issues, and more likely, six. Twelve pages, I think, black and white, coated paper, super glossy – expensive looking! I don’t remember what it cost to publish, or how many copies I had printed for each issue. I don’t remember where the money came from, or who picked up the tab, but strange as this might sound, as a religious brother with a vow of poverty in a Catholic teaching order, money did not seem to be an issue.

The magazine contained essays, poetry, artwork, short stories, and an introduction written by the publisher (me!) – all content was supplied by my high school students, mostly juniors and seniors.  I had no trouble finding enough content, in fact just the opposite. I was especially pleased with the front cover art work  by Daniel Sheehan, one of my students.  (I’m straining now) but one cover was  a clown, another a balloon seller, another a dancer, and so forth.  

The magazine looked great!  I was pleased!

However, “Syndic” did not sit well with some of the older religious brothers in my community. (If I was twenty-six, these older brothers might have been all of forty-five – definitely old to me!)  “Syndic” had a dark side, one suggested; another said it was negative; another wondered if high school boys should be permitted to read, let alone, write this kind of material; yet another said,  he found it depressing. My religious superior offered no comment.

Flying in the face of these “old” adult religious male celibates with their harsh reviews of “Syndic” was difficult and unnerving. On the one hand I was elated – and pleased with myself –  that students were writing and composing and had a serious-minded magazine devoted to publishing their work; on the other hand, I had to live 24/7 with my religious critics, and despite my cocksure demeanor, bordering on arrogance, I was not at all sure of myself. Somehow, I knew the “Syndic” was good for the students, but how much, I did not know, and more importantly,  could I afford to buck the political religious establishment wherein I resided? 

“Syndic ended”. Nothing dramatic, or even announced. I just stopped doing the work that made it happen. No one said a word – either students or critics. It never happened.

I have decided to revive the “Syndic” . . . I AM nuts!

Cesar Chavez Said . . . May 2010

Saturday, May 22nd, 2010
 
 

Cesar Chavez & Eliseo Medina / Photo by Mark Pitt

Cesar Chavez Said . . . May 2010

Cesar Chavez said, “Are we a union or a movement?”

Eliseo Medina said, “We are a union!”

Cesar Chavez said, “We are a movement! We are a union!”

Eliseo Medina said, “ I am leaving!”

Cesar Chavez said, “I am not a labor leader, I will dedicate my next fast to life.”

Dolores Huerta said, “Cesar Chavez was right!”

The Los Angeles Times said, “Cesar Chavez was not a labor leader!”

Eliseo Medina said, “After thirty years, I was right to tell the Los Angeles Times!”

The Los Angeles Times said, “Eliseo Medina is a national labor leader!”

Eliseo Medina said, “I am a national labor leader!”

Kaiser Hospital said, “Dolores Huerta must leave our cafeteria!”

Eliseo Medina said, “Kaiser Hospital must tell Dolores Huerta to leave our cafeteria!”

Dolores Huerta said, “I will not leave!”

Kaiser Hospital said, “Eliseo Medina told us to close the cafeteria!”

Dolores Huerta said, “I am not leaving!”

Mike Casey said: “This is how a company union operates!”

Fred Ross, Jr. said: “This union-busting collusion with Kaiser is shameful!”

Eliseo Medina said:  “I am a national labor leader!”

Cesar Chavez said: “Are we a union or a movement?”

Cesar Chavez: Movement or Union? / Photo by Jon Lewis

THE CONTEXT: Randy Shaw Blog 

“I’m very sorry, but it isn’t prudent . . .”

Tuesday, May 18th, 2010

POPE BENEDICT XVI - VICAR OF CHRIST

“I Am Very Sorry, But It Isn’t Prudent . . .”

“It was better for eight innocent men to suffer than for millions to lose their faith.” – Canon lawyer Martha Wegan in a telephone conversation with a clerical sex abuse victim, historian Jose Barba Martin. – New York Times/May 3, 2010.

“It was better for eight innocent men to suffer than for millions to lose their faith”.

On its face, this statement cannot be true. There is no relationship between the injustice of permitting suffering innocence and millions losing their faith. At best, Ms. Wegan’s comment is advice –  a long-suffering appeal for sacrifice –   one might give to a religious novice, or perhaps it is meant to sugar coat a bitter pill that must be swallowed  by religious true believers in order to shield their religious superiors and/or the Church’s priestly caste from prosecution. At worst, it is a throwback to the thousand year-old canon law principle that clerical or church wrongdoing must remain forever secret, known only to church authorities, lest the faithful be scandalized and suffer the loss of their souls. What nonsense!

Pope Benedict XVI, then Cardinal Ratizinger , is more truthful than Ms. Wegan, and pulled no punches, when he  informed Bishop Talavera of Mexico that the Vatican would not file charges in this case: “I am very sorry, but it isn’t prudent”.  It wasn’t “prudent” because the cleric who would have been charged with sexual abuse was “very beloved by the pope and had done a lot of good for the church.”  None of this is about the loss of faith or scandalizing the faithful – not a bit! –  it is about protecting the organizational church from accountability and about the Church’s supremely human system of influence-politics – knowing the people in power and ingratiating oneself with them.

In this regard, the Catholic Church is no better or worse, than any multi-national business corporation or NGO, which seeks to avoid criticism or charges of wrong doing especially about sex abuse – cover up by intimidating the accuser and/or trashing their career, or if pinned to the wall, negotiate a no-fault legal settlement on condition of secrecy.

COAT OF ARMS - Pope Benedict XVI

 Using this business model to stifle allegations of wrong doing in the Catholic Church is morally unacceptable and certainly hypocritical because the Church holds itself up as a divinely inspired religious and spiritual institution concerned about the eternal salvation of its members. Catholics are taught, and expected to believe, that the Pope – sometimes officially referred to as the Sweet Christ on Earth or the Vicar of Christ –   is a direct successor of the Apostles of Jesus, and when elected as the Supreme Pontiff, was entrusted with the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. The Catholic Church defines itself as the Mystical Body of Christ.

These are all profoundly mysterious concepts with mindboggling implications that have been reinforced by two thousand years of institutional history and in the face of widespread international clerical sex abuse of children what kind of response should the Church be expected to make?  

Thus far, the response has been pitiful – orchestrated cover up by church authorities, reassignment of the offending cleric to another parish, and when pushed to the wall, purchasing secrecy through financial settlements. Oh yes, I have read  about the new “zero tolerance” policy of the U.S. Catholic Bishops but I have yet to read that a single U.S. bishop has resigned because of his hands-on involvement in the cover up. Where is the admission of institutional wrong-doing? Where is the institutional accountability?

Dare I ask, “What would Jesus do?” Or has this question been forever forfeited to the Comedy Hour programs to be used as a laugh line?  If the pope dares to accept the title of Sweet Christ On Earth, then why not model Jesus? Or is this pope the person to whom Jesus referred when he preached: “They (church authorities) love to sit at the head table at church dinners, basking in the most prominent positions, preening in the radiance of public flattery, receiving honorary degrees, and getting called ‘Doctor’ and ‘Reverend’ . . .” Assuming best case scenario – Pope Benedict XVI wishes to follow in the footsteps of Jesus of Nazareth –   what WOULD Jesus do?

CHALICE OF POPE BENEDICT XVI

Of course I don’t know,  but my wish list would include: (1) Discard the lavish trappings and accoutrements of noblemen and royalty  inherited from the Holy Roman Empire.  Put aside, the gold-threaded liturgical vestments, the bejeweled crosses, rings and chalices, the embroidered medieval headdress and gold crosiers, the ermine capes, silk cassocks and red silk slippers, and dare I add, the designer eyewear!  What do any of these symbols of royalty and power and luxury have to do with the teaching of the Jesus of Nazareth? (2) Divest the Church of all ownership and any revenue relating to the Christian shrines of the Holy Land, including Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem, Basilica of the Nativity in Bethlehem, and the Basilica of the Annunciation in Nazareth. For hundreds of years, these shrines have been flash points of contention, even armed conflict, among Christian factions, between religious orders, Moslems and Jews – the issue is always the same:  ownership, power and money. Pilgrimages and tourism aside, what religious purpose do these theme park edifices serve? How do these shrines promote the Gospel values of living a good life?

Church of the Holy Sepulcher In Jerusalem

Jesus of Nazareth offered us a simple truth about life: all that was necessary, he said, was to love God and to love others, and then went on to show us how: I am the Road, the Truth and the Life. No one gets to the Father apart from me. Cathedrals, basilicas, churches, religious shrines, the Holy Land, are not Gospel values, nor do they promote the simple truth about life advocated by Jesus.

Dear Mr. Bishop Olmsted . . .

Sunday, May 16th, 2010

“A nun at a Catholic hospital in Phoenix, Arizona was automatically excommunicated after approving an abortion be performed on a patient in order to save the woman’s life . . . Olmsted confirmed McBride was “automatically excommunicated” because of her involvement in the abortion” (NewsCore 5/16/10)

"JESUS CARITAS" OLMSTED COAT OF ARMS

Dear Mr. Bishop Olmsted,

Arizona is much in the news this month, and your contribution has certainly been a major one.  Speaking of “automatic excommunication” I trust you will soon release an official announcement of excommunication for  those U.S. Catholic bishops and church officials who orchestrated the cover up of more than 10,000 cases of clerical sex abuse involving children.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Jesus Caritas,

Catholic LeRoy Chatfield