Quite a number of years ago, it was estimated that every year there are some 500 articles and monographs, both popular and scholarly, written throughout the world on the North African pastor-theologian-saint Augustine (354‒430). Continue Reading...

Cardinal John Joseph O’Connor’s vocation to serve the spiritual needs of God’s children—in war and in peace, in life and in death—has left a legacy that transcends the bounds of today’s narrow, irreligious politics. Born to Serve John Joseph O’Connor was born in 1920 in the great American city of Philadelphia to an Irish Catholic father and a Catholic-convert mother of German Jewish descent. The future prelate’s passion for the Catholic Church and thirst for knowledge was apparent at a young age. O’Connor had already determined he wanted to be a priest upon graduating from West Philadelphia Catholic High School for Boys and enrolled at Saint Charles Borromeo Seminary. He subsequently received advanced degrees from Villanova and the University of America before completing a doctorate in political science at Georgetown University. At Georgetown, O’Connor studied under President Ronald Reagan’s former U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Jeane Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick, declared O’Connor, “surely one of the two or three smartest graduate students I’ve ever had.” Every year, Georgetown hosts the Cardinal O’Connor Conference on Life, which takes place around the March for Life and features philosophers, civic leaders, and distinguished clergy that make the case for the dignity of human life from conception to natural death. Serving the Spiritual Needs of the Troops O’Connor answered the call to serve in the military and provide for the spiritual needs of American troops. In 1952, that meant joining the Navy as the Korean War raged. He subsequently worked as a military chaplain on ships stationed all over the world—from the Atlantic, Caribbean, and Mediterranean. In Vietnam, O’Connor saw combat firsthand. Twice the Irish Catholic from Philadelphia earned the Legion of Merit for his outstanding military service. Later, O’Connor would author a book about his pastoral experience titled “Principles and Problems of Naval Leadership, A Chaplain Looks at Vietnam.” After his service in Vietnam, O’Connor was named the chief chaplain of the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis in 1972. About three years later, he was appointed chief of chaplains for the entire U.S. Navy. After serving as the bishop of Scranton for less than a year, O’Connor was elevated to lead the crown jewel of Catholic dioceses in America: New York. Pope St. John Paul II appointed O’Connor a cardinal in 1985. O’Connor’s War Against AIDS O’Connor used his high-profile role to champion Christian bioethics from ministering to those dying of AIDS, to protecting the unborn, to combating the scourge of antisemitism.  In the 1980s, O’Connor was known to visit the AIDS unit at St. Clare’s (Catholic) Hospital in Manhattan. O’Connor’s fight against the debilitating illness, while never capitulating on traditional Catholic values of life, family, and marriage, translated to the Catholic hospital system. In 1989, around 10% of his archdiocese’s health care beds were dedicated to those diagnosed with the horrendous disease. And in 1987, Reagan appointed O’Connor to a national commission to combat the disease. From a public policy perspective, O’Connor was a stalwart advocate to secure more funding for research on the disease. In spite of these efforts, the Catholic clergyman faced vehement protests for supporting the Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality. Perhaps most notably was a mass protest on Dec. 10, 1989, that disrupted his mass in the iconic St. Patrick’s Cathedral on 5th Avenue, which led to dozens of people being arrested inside the church. In his typical cheerful fashion, O’Connor led his congregation in prayer to overcome the protesters’ disturbances. A Political, Diplomatic, and Spiritual Legacy O’Connor was also honored by the American government for his international diplomacy, inter-faith outreach, and his ability to speak to people across the political aisle. O’Connor was inspired to perform inter-faith ministry when he visited Dachau in 1975. After he saw the remains of mass murder and torture, he was so moved that he looked to found a new religious order dedicated to protecting human life. Years later, O’Connor’s idea became a reality when eight women formed the Sisters of Life in New York in 1991. For his work, he was also honored by the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee. O’Connor’s advocacy for the Jewish people during his entire life occurred without him knowing that he was the grandson of a rabbi or his mother’s Jewish lineage. In 2000, Congress granted O’Connor the Congressional Gold Medal, citing his advocacy “of interfaith healing and understanding, particularly among individuals of the Catholic and Jewish faiths,” and noted that he had “played a significant role in helping to establish diplomatic ties between the Vatican and Israel.” Then-President Bill Clinton bestowed the medal on O’Connor, and the Clintons were among several prominent New York Democrats who attended O’Connor’s funeral when the bishop died just months later. To this day, O’Connor is remembered as someone whose personality allowed him to work across the political divide for common goals. Among his admirers was former New York City Mayor Ed Koch, who described him as “a great man.” A Debt of Gratitude I, personally, am indebted to O’Connor. O’Connor mentored and ordained Fr. John Richard Neuhaus, a Catholic priest in the archdiocese of New York. From that clerical position, Neuhaus would steward for almost two decades the most influential magazine at the intersection of religion and public life: First Things. Years later that still thriving publication would give this journalist his first job out of college. The post Cardinal John Joseph O’Connor: Born to Serve appeared first on The Daily Signal.

As a general rule, painfully forced acronyms for legislative packages are one of the most obnoxious attention-getting feints in Washington, D.C. It's hard to pick the worst offender because there are simply so many, although the The Standardizing Testing and Accountability Before Large Elections Giving Electors Necessary Information for Unobstructed...

Somewhere between 30%-50% of Americans make New Year’s resolutions, reports from last year show. A study from YouGov revealed some of the more common resolutions made and whether people think they’ll keep their resolutions. More than a quarter of participants chose “saving more money,” while the second most popular resolution was “improving physical health.” However, Dr. Michelle Rozen’s research reveals that 94% of people fail to keep their New Year’s resolutions. “In fact, Baylor College of Medicine (BCM) reports that 88% of people who set New Year’s resolutions fail before the end of January.” Resolutions might be popular but those who keep them are few. Most of us have probably had this experience. For me, I remember having a few years in a row where I made the commitment to exercise more and eat better. Quickly, within a week or two, I began to make excuses. Exercising involved waking up earlier or staying up later at night. Eating healthier meant that if we had a family celebration or a work party that I could not partake in the dessert. Admittedly, once the commitment became a challenge, I abandoned it. Reflecting on what I would like to change in the upcoming year has made me more honest about how I made these resolutions in the past and how important it is to choose something that is more meaningful. In all honesty, I never made a formal commitment. I would tell myself that I wanted to go to the gym or stop eating as much ice cream. If people asked if I had any resolutions, I would tell them I am going to work out more and eat better, but it was vague. These are two aspects that I am going to change for 2026. Choosing something to give up means I need to formally choose it by writing it down and sharing it with my wife and closest friend. Doing this makes the promise more real and I can count on them to keep me accountable. Second, it’s important to make the resolution more concrete in its expectations and therefore more meaningful. Setting a clear goal is what Rozen calls, “getting granular.” Being as specific as possible is arguably the most important trait found in those who actually keep their goals and follow through on them. With this in mind, I want to be granular about something that will be truly meaningful. While exercising and having a healthy diet is pivotal for the human person, this year I want to focus more on things that last and that go beyond myself. This year, I am committing to more prayer time which requires less screen time and will enable me to be more intentional about the time I spend with my family. This means that I am committing to waking up each morning and praying for 15-30 minutes. I’ll focus on a Bible passage and journal about it while allowing it to fuel my meditation. I have three kids (aged 5, 3, and 1), so the morning makes the promise more concrete. It is also truly the only way I can keep this commitment long term. I know that when I pray in the morning, I am a better man, husband and father. This connection with the living God makes me more grateful, more patient and more willing to sacrifice. Seeing my oldest child, Ben, enter kindergarten this year and become a little boy instead of a toddler has sparked in me a desire to be more present to all my kids and my wife in conversations. I know that what keeps me from doing this is my attachment to my phone and work computer. So, to accomplish this I am going to place my phone in my bedroom when I get home from work. I am making a rule to not go on my work computer in front of my children. These two changes (ones that I have already started incorporating in my routine in December), have already brought more of a focus on wasting time with my family rather than being caught up with social media or work emails. Ultimately, my hope is that being more prayerful will make me more grounded in what is most important in life. It will connect me with the God of love and encountering God first thing will propel me to be more vigilant in keeping my promise to be off my screen and more engaged with the precious time I have with my wife and kids. I cannot imagine a more important resolution to make—and to keep. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Making New Year’s Resolutions That Matter appeared first on The Daily Signal.

In this episode of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words,” Victor Davis Hanson and Jack Fowler discuss how California bureaucrats and environmental lawyers are threatening to blow up dams and deny water to 600,000 residents, “a symbolic act to punish civilization and hurt people.” Editor’s note: This content was recorded by Victor Davis Hanson prior to his Dec. 30 medical operation. This is a lightly edited transcript of a segment from today’s edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words” from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to VDH’s own YouTube channel to watch past episodes. Jack Fowler: There’s a disturbing article on this website UNWON. We’ve talked once or twice in the past about some articles they’ve done, but they’ve been covering things that happened to rural America. And there is this story. We’ve talked about water and dams in the past, but I think this is worth knowing because even if you don’t live there, Victor, there are people who rely on rural California dams and the water it produces that goes to farms that we eat the product of all across America and all across the world.  So, there’s this story. I suggest people check it out. It’s titled “Round Valley. Indian Tribes Attorney Says ‘Two-Basin Solution’ Water Diversions to Sonoma and Mendocino Will Stop.” What does that mean? That’s a mouthful of a headline, but it comes down to the continuing desire and not only desire, but the actuality of California bureaucrats blowing up dams. The PG&E, the power company out there, which has some rights with these dams, wanting them blown up because they’re tired of being sued by “Trouts are people too” nonprofits and other kinds of wacko Left entities.  So, folks still need the water, and there’s some talk, “Well, we’re going to blow up these dams. They’ll still be able to get this water source that goes through this Round Valley Indian tribe land.” Now, at a recent hearing, the Round Valley Indian tribe lawyer says, that’s not going to happen.  So, at some point, if all these things go forward, Victor, 600,000 people, a huge amount of people, 600,000 people are going to be without water because of bureaucrats in California who get a thrill out of sticking it to rural America. That’s my take. Anyway, Victor, I think this is worth your commentary on before we get to some questions.  Victor Davis Hanson: I didn’t vote for him. Nobody voted for these people. The larger picture is that California has been so rich naturally and so rich with its legacy of very brilliant people that were here that built Los Angeles, built the California water project, built the dams, built the infrastructure, the aqueduct, that it had a margin of error And so, our generation—I’m a baby boomer born in 1950—we haven’t contributed very much. We’re parasitical. So we sue, we take land out of production, we do all of this, and then we don’t ever ask ourselves, “Well, who’s going to pay for all this?”  So, the actual diversions from the Eel River, except in the winter, are only about 2% or 3%. So, it’s not like they’re taking water from indigenous people. They’re honoring pretty old water contracts.  And so, the environmentalist lawyers are saying that existing contracts—and California does not have a very long lineage. It’s not Massachusetts. Basically, people didn’t come here until about 1840s. Jedidiah Smith, people before that, and then the Gold Rush in 1849 started that, and then there was statehood early in ’51, I think. And then you had a whole corpus of water law. And they’re saying that they can vitiate that, invalidate it, because of ancestral hunting grounds. They did that with the Klamath [River]. Four dams they blew up and said that they obstructed salmon runs. And I understand that we want to have social justice, but the whole indigenous land is such a volatile issue. Anybody who challenges this idea that this land belongs to Indigenous people is called a racist or a white racist.  It’s hard to talk about, but the fact of the matter is land changes all the time. The Americans came. They fought indigenous people. Indigenous people before they came had fought the Mexican government in California. The Mexican government came after fighting the Spanish government. The Spanish government came after fighting Indigenous people. The Indigenous people fought with other constantly. If you want to talk about an imperialist project, look at the history of the Comanches or the Lakota Sioux or the Blackfoot, I mean, they were merciless to other Indigenous people and they created empires by taking lands and hunting grounds. So, that’s the human side of things. The other thing is that these reservations and everything, these lawyers, they don’t live in a vacuum. So, when they’re saying we have rights to go back to pre-civilization and have our ancestral land free of the so-called settlers who came in and made these dams and water diversions and made the Napa Valley … Napa Valley is very dry. Anybody who goes up in drives from Healdsburg to Napa or Santa Rosa or any of those, it’s a paradise.  It looks like a valley in Italy, or Provence or something in France. It’s just beautiful and they did that by their own skill, and they created the world’s most lucrative, successful and best wine place in the world. And they came after there had been cattle ranchers, apple growers in the 19th century. That’s why everybody wants to go there. Everybody in California, if you wake up on a Saturday morning or Sunday morning and you happen to, unfortunately, be on 101 going north from San Francisco, it’s a bottleneck.  And I’ve done that and that’s because all of these San Francisco and South Bay people, their idea of a beautiful Saturday afternoon, or Sunday, is “Let’s go drive up to the wine country.” And they drive up, and they drive around, and they see these beautiful terraced hills, there’s Lombardi poplars, there’s cypress tree driveways. It’s just sculpted. It looks like a picture of Tuscany. And then you see these beautiful wineries, these beautiful restaurants. All of that came from water. Not very much. They were very good about water, but the Eel River was one, Russian River’s another. They had some diversions and further north to cattle and stuff. But my point is this: No Indigenous people—and it’s very hard to find somebody who is entirely indigenous. My former mother-in-law had a name Tawana, and they were from Oklahoma. They had Cherokee, and I once asked her, and she said almost everybody that they knew had Cherokee heritage. But we ended up with the 116th rule in the United States, so that if you wanted to go to a reservation you were 116th or one-eighth or something. But it was very hard to find people that you could define someone with a Cherokee name or an indigenous name that had not been assimilated. And then we tried to make up for that with the reservation system—fraught with corruption, yes—but still the reservations in total are larger than many states—their land. And then, more importantly, we went into the gaming, and some of these tribes are fabulously wealthy.  But the point I’m making is this: This environmental law firm says we’re going to stop the diversions of 2% or 3%. It’s not going to hurt. It’s not going to get a lot of water back to the Indigenous. It’s a symbolic act to punish civilization and hurt people, 600,000 people in this case. Editor’s Note: In response to the UNWON article discussed by Hanson and Fowler, the Eel-Russia Project Authority (ERPA) accuses UNWON of “misinformation” and “inaccurate” reporting. According to ERPA: “UNWON published statements without the full context of a presentation given to the Round Valley Indian Tribes and relied on selected excerpts that resulted in misinformation. This response corrects the blog post’s inaccuracies and offers clarifying information.” You can read the full follow-up UNWON article here. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Victor Davis Hanson: California Bureaucrats Threaten the Water of 600K appeared first on The Daily Signal.