Memorial Day

I suppose it's a sign of age, but I still can't get used to this Monday holiday thing. For my younger readers, assuming I have any, the change came about in 1968 when Congress passed the cleverly named Uniform Monday Holiday Act. As a result, in 1971 Memorial Day began to be celebrated on the last Monday of May. 

I much preferred it when Memorial Day always fell on May 30, no matter what. It seemed far more sacred when it didn't just mean the third day of a three-day weekend. In some respects, and to a large portion of our citizenry, Memorial Day has lost its meaning. This morning, for example, I watched as a stream of young, college-age kids were interviewed on some beach. For most Memorial Day simply meant another day to party, instead of a special day to thank those who gave their lives so they could enjoy theirs. 

I really can't envision an easy way to educate the younger generations on such things since our school systems probably teach that our dead soldiers, sailors, and marines were just a collection of militaristic racists, fascists, and Islamophobes. Too many of their parents haven't a clue either, so maybe it's up to the grandparents, while we're still around. 

My opinion? Get rid of all those three-day weekends. The birthdays of George Washington (February 22) and Abraham Lincoln (February 12) got dumped in favor of the insipid Presidents Day, now celebrated on the third Monday of February. I would guess a vast majority of American under the age of 40 don't know that Presidents Day celebrates the lives of these two men: Washington and Lincoln. A few years ago, one of our soup kitchen guests told me that Presidents Day celebrated "Obama's birthday." She was more than a little disappointed when I informed her of its actual purpose.

And then there's Columbus Day...Yes, we still celebrate the anniversary of Christopher Columbus' arrival in the Americas. Originally celebrated on October 12, it was moved to the second Monday of October. 

Of course, the politically correct crowd considers Columbus to be guilty of genocide and lump him together with such pleasant people as Adolph Hitler. Although it's still, thankfully, a national holiday, many states have stopped celebrating Columbus Day, replacing it with such holidays as Indigenous Peoples Day or Discoverers Day or Native American Day. I'm sorry, but I'll stick with Columbus. And do you know something else? I'm glad the Europeans came here and took over, bringing Christianity with them. Yes, they weren't always kind to the natives, but in truth the natives had a history of being far more brutal to each other. This doesn't excuse those who mistreated the indigenous folks, but like today too many didn't practice their Christian faith. Anyway, come October 12, I will raise a glass of good Italian wine in a salute to that intrepid explorer.

This year, because the nation will celebrate Memorial Day on Monday, May 25, and since May 30 falls on Saturday, I've decided to celebrate Memorial Week instead. 

I will thank God first for the many men I knew well who gave their lives for us -- men like Henry Wright and Bart Creed, just two of many of my Naval Academy classmates (1967) who lost their lives during the Vietnam conflict. I'll also remember Ron Zinn, my brother's West Point classmate (1962) and roommate who died in combat in Vietnam. This week I will pray for the souls of these men, as well as all the other valiant men I knew who sacrificed their lives for our freedom. 

USNA Class (1967) Service Deaths

I will also thank God for those in my family who served this country honorably but are no longer with us. Since none of them died in combat, I realize it's more fitting to celebrate their lives on Veterans Day. But each of these men were more than willing to give up their lives for their country. I think of my grandfather, Sgt. John McCarthy, who served in the Philippines during the Spanish-American War and then took part in the rescue mission to Peking during the Boxer Rebellion. I think, too, of my Uncle Bill Dorley, who served in the Navy aboard an Atlantic destroyer during World War One; and my father, Colonel John McCarthy, who served in Europe during and after World War Two; and my brother, Major Jeff McCarthy, who, like me, served in Vietnam. 

I ask you all to call to mind those you knew who gave their lives so that we might live ours in freedom. Thank God for them this week. Pray for their souls, that our loving God take them into His eternal embrace. Jesus said it best the night before He died: 

"Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" [Jn 15:13].

And remember, too, that freedom is a precious commodity. Too many of our politicians have little or no respect for freedom or for those who died defending it. Keep that in mind when you vote this November.

Pray for our nation this week.

Benedict Arnold, American Patriot?

While we were away on our trip to New England, the magazines piled up along with the rest of the mail. Today I finally got around to reading the May issue of Smithsonian. in which I found a fascinating article about the American general turned traitor, Benedict Arnold. You can read the article online here: Why Benedict Arnold Turned Traitor. According to the article's author, Nathaniel Phibrick, the ultimate reason for Arnold's defection to the British was clear: money. 

The article brought to mind something Dear Diane and I saw in the fall of 2013 while visiting the UK. We had just left Victoria Station on a bus which would take us to Harwich where we would board our Celebrity cruise ship for the transatlantic voyage home. When the bus stopped in London traffic I glanced out the window and noticed a plaque affixed to the front entrance of a building. Here's a photo I took from the window of our bus.

I remember thinking at the time, "American Patriot?", and assuming the words were likely written either by Arnold's family or by some Brit bureaucrat who yearned for the empire's colonial past. No American could have written them. I especially liked the two flags -- British and American -- a nice touch.

The building entrance with plaque

Then I discovered that the plaque is a relatively recent addition to the Westminster neighborhood (1987), thanks to the efforts of one Peter Arnold, whom we are told is not a descendant. (You can read about the origin of the plaque here: American Patriot in London.) This current Arnold believes that Benedict Arnold was greatly misunderstood and simply tried to do what he believed was best for America. Yeah, right! At least that's what Benedict Arnold told himself and others to rationalize and justify his traitorous acts. But what he really needed, and demanded from the British, was cash to keep his new loyalist wife happy.

Yes, Arnold had been a patriot, at least, for a time, but that earlier loyalty to the American cause was wiped out by his one, final act of disloyalty -- disloyalty not only to his country, but also to the man to whom he owed so very much: General George Washington.

Oh, yes, the building displaying the plaque is now the office of an oral surgeon.

Rest in peace, General.

Religion and Our Nation's Future

John Adams

Our nation seems to be rapidly approaching a crossroads that demands we as a people make a decision about the kind of society our children and grandchildren will inherit. We have made many such decisions in the past, but at some point the cumulative effect of these decisions may just lead us down a path to an irrevocable future, one that will alter the very structure of our society. I believe the stability of our society is dependent more on our adherence to religious values than on anything else. Once we jettison those values, once we reject the religious faith that motivated our ancestors, we also must reject the "permanent things" that form the very foundation of our society. As John Adams wrote to his wife, Abigail, in 1775, "A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."

I may have time to revisit this subject in more detail later, but until then I've included below some relevant comments made by folks much wiser than I. Some were present when our nation was formed, while others came after but recognized the indispensability of religion to the life of our nation.

George Washington

The first is an excerpt from George Washington's Farewell Address (1796), a document all Americans should read:

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

"It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"

Today, sadly, some are indeed attempting to shake that very foundation. Here are a few other comments worth pondering:

"Our constitution was made only for a moral religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” -- John Adams, Letter to the Officers of the First Brigade of the Third Division of the Militia of Massachusetts, 1798

"Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of learning shall ever be encouraged.” -- First Continental Congress, Northwest Ordinance, 1787

Imagine that! Schools that focus on turning out good citizens by instilling both wisdom and virtue.

Alexis de Tocqueville

After his extensive visit to the United States early in the 19th century, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote the classic, Democracy in America, in which he commented on the the religious values of the American people:

“I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion—for who can search the human heart?—but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society . . . While the law permits the Americans to do what they please, religion prevents them from conceiving, and forbids them to commit, what is rash or unjust.”

Once religion is suppressed or removed from the public square, on what will our nation base its administration of justice?

William O. Douglas

And finally, here's a comment made by a self-proclaimed twentieth-century liberal, Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who wrote for the majority in a 1952 decision (Zorack v. Clausen) that permitted public schools to release children early to attend religious education.

“We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. We guarantee the freedom to worship as one chooses. We make room for as wide a variety of beliefs and creeds as the spiritual needs of man deem necessary. We sponsor an attitude on the part of government that shows no partiality to any one group and that lets each flourish according to the zeal of its adherents and the appeal of its dogma. When the state [343 U.S. 306, 314]   encourages religious instruction or cooperates with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public events to sectarian needs, it follows the best of our traditions. For it then respects the religious nature of our people and accommodates the public service to their spiritual needs. To hold that it may not would be to find in the Constitution a requirement that the government show a callous indifference to religious groups. That would be preferring those who believe in no religion over those who do believe. Government may not finance religious groups nor undertake religious instruction nor blend secular and sectarian education nor use secular institutions to force one or some religion on any person. But we find no constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence.”

My, how things have changed. I can't think of a single liberal politician or judge today who would agree with Justice Douglas' comments. By today's standards, he sounds very much like a staunch conservative.


God bless America.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Location:N. Andover, Massachusets