Denver Newsroom, Aug 6, 2020 / 06:00 am (CNA).- Professor Angela Alaimo O’Donnell has studied Flannery O’Connor, an American Catholic author from the South, rather extensively. She wrote a book on O’Connor’s treatment of racial issues specifically, entitled “Radical Ambivalence: Race in Flannery O’Connor.”
So when the Fordham professor heard that Flannery O’Connor’s name would be removed from a residence hall at Loyola University Maryland, due to concerns over apparently racist remarks in some of her personal correspondence, O’Donnell decided to act by petitioning the university to reconsider. Her petition has been signed by more than 200 people, including O’Connor scholars, theologians, and writers of color.
So far, O’Donnell has not received a response.
“I was hoping to get a note from Father Linnane (president of Loyola University) just acknowledging the letter, but I haven’t heard anything from him. He probably is besieged by a lot of letters. I’m hoping that he will eventually respond, but so far I haven’t heard anything,” O’Donnell told CNA.
“I thought it was a great teachable moment for Loyola to have an opportunity to talk with students and take their time. I really don’t understand the rush,” she said. O’Donnell’s advocacy for O’Connor is not so much about a building, she said, and it’s not to deny O’Connor’s racist comments.
Rather, it’s about the swift erasure – the canceling, if you will – of O’Connor without the campus community considering a fuller picture of her person and what her work has to say to the current generation.
“I know Father Linnane says people can still teach Flannery O’Connor, that she’s not being removed from campus,” O’Donnell said. “But I don’t think Father Linnane realizes that, effectively, she’s not going to be on campus anymore, unless the faculty member (teaching her works) is tenured and also is very brave, and wants to have these conversations about race.”
O’Connor was a short story writer, novelist, and essayist as well as a devout Catholic who attended daily Mass. She lived most of her life in Georgia and became renowned for her biting Southern Gothic style of fiction. She died of lupus in 1964, at the age of 39.
Attention was drawn to apparent racism in O’Connor’s personal writings by “How Racist Was Flannery O’Connor?”, a piece that appeared in the New Yorker in June. There, Paul Elie wrote that “letters and postcards she sent home from the North in 1943 were made available to scholars only in 2014, and they show O’Connor as a bigoted young woman.” Some of the passages quoted by Elie had been published for the first time in O’Donnell’s book.
O’Donnell said professors should not ignore O’Connors comments about race in her correspondence. Rather, she said, they should be seen as just one piece of the full picture of who Flannery O’Connor was, and be compared to the way she treats racism in her works of fiction.
“It’s got to be a conversation about race. I welcome that,” O’Donnell said, adding that the purpose of her book in the first place was to genuinely pose the question of how Flannery can still be taught in classrooms given some of her problematic racist comments in her personal letters.
“How do you teach Flannery O’Connor in the classroom? What can you do? Because I think it’s worth us considering it from the angle of pedagogy and culture, how you encounter every writer. Every writer needs to be reevaluated with each new generation, and then we decide what it is that he or she has to offer, and whether or not it’s helpful. And so this is a really good moment to reevaluate O’Connor in a thoughtful way,” she said, “and not the way that Elie does, and not the way that Loyola has done.”
In many ways, O’Donnell noted, O’Connor is the perfect author for this moment in history especially because of how she treats racism in her work, which faces its ugliness head-on and views it as a sin.
“Her stories are powerful, iconic stories, and very realistic gritty depictions of what it was like to be alive in a culture, the very, very racist culture of the American south during the Civil Rights Movement, during a time of enormous change,” O’Donnell said.
And O’Connor’s favorite description of her job as a fiction writer was to live “hotly in pursuit of the real,” O’Donnell said, so her stories “do not look away from very difficult and challenging situations.”
In her stories, O’Connor portrays “a complex sort of dance that black Americans and white Americans had to negotiate in order to live together in a segregated culture. And it always reflects badly on white people, because they were – most white people are – ignorant of their racism. And the few who do know it oftentimes are proud of it and think it’s a badge of honor. And she just mercilessly exposes those people,” O’Donnell said.
O’Donnell said there are “all sorts of ways” in which Americans today experience the same or similar kinds of racism, whether personally or systemically. “And the fact that we have this writer who exposes it so knowingly, and exposes it to censure, it’s a powerful way of seeing how far we have not come,” she said.
As a devout Catholic, O’Connor also “thought about this in theological terms. She thought that racism was a sin. A sin against God, a sin against human beings, a sin against grace. And so in a number of her stories the people who are the most egregious racists really get their comeuppance in the course of the story,” she added.
Alice Walker, an African American writer and feminist who grew up in the same area of Georgia as the O’Connors, was one of the signatories of the petition sent to Loyola University Maryland. The letter opens with a statement from Walker, who said: “We must honor Flannery for growing. Hide nothing of what she was, and use that to teach.”
Walker herself is an admirer of O’Connor’s work. In an essay that appeared in the Dec. 1994/Jan. 1995 edition of Sojourners magazine, Walker wrote that it was O’Connor’s biting portrayal of Southern white people that initially captured her attention.
“It was for her description of Southern white women that I appreciated her work at first, because when she set her pen to them not a whiff of magnolia hovered in the air (and the tree itself might never have been planted), and yes, I could say, yes, these white folks without the magnolia (who are indifferent to the tree’s existence), and these black folks without melons and superior racial patience, these are like Southerners that I know,” Walker wrote.
O’Donnell added that Walker has also, in her past critiques of O’Connor, “really admired the fact that O’Connor did not pretend to be able to get inside the minds of her black characters.”
O’Connor admitted at one point that she did not write from the perspective of African Americans because she did not understand them.
“And so Walker saw this as a kind of a respectful distance that O’Connor kept, allowing black characters to have their own privacy, so she never pretends to know what they’re thinking.”
“I think what Walker valued was that she could see in O’Connor, this development, this struggle, and was wrestling with the problem of race. And…it’s foolish and shortsighted not to honor that and acknowledge that as being human.”
Something else that people today can learn from O’Connor is how to face and challenge the racism that exists even within themselves, O’Donnell said.
“All of us who are born and raised in this white privileged culture, we imbibe this from the time that we’re born into the world, and it’s impossible for us to escape it. It’s just impossible,” she said.
“The best that we can do is be knowledgeable about the fact, be knowledgeable of our blindnesses, and try to work against them and do what we call now anti-racist work. And one of the forms that anti-racist work took for O’Connor was: ‘Okay, I know I have this problem. I know all the people I live with and love have this problem, including my mother and including my aunt and my friends. And so I’m going to write stories that expose this problem.’”
For those who want to read some of O’Connor’s most poignant fiction that treats racism, O’Donnell recommended four stories. The first, “Revelation,” was one of O’Connor’s “last stories and one of her most powerful stories. It is a portrait of a racist who has a wake-up call and understands very clearly what she’s guilty of by the end of the story. And in some ways that person, that main character, is a portrait of O’Connor.”
Another story by O’Connor about race that O’Donnell recommended is “Everything That Rises Must Converge,” in which one of the characters seeks to atone for the racism of his mother, and must confront his own hypocrisy.
Another story, “The Geranium,” is one of the first that O’Connor ever published.
“It’s about an old white man who goes to live in New York with his daughter, and is horrified when he moves next door to black people. And he has a wake-up call,” O’Donnell said.
“And the last story that Flannery worked on on her death bed was a rewriting of that same story, it’s called ‘Judgment Day.’ So, O’Connor’s work – she only wrote 31 stories- is book-ended by these two stories and that story she rewrote four times in the course of her life.”
“And with each new version, her depiction of the relationship between the races gets more and more complex as she goes along. That is a sign of somebody who, throughout the course of her professional life as a writer, is growing and changing and developing,” O’Donnell said.
“She’s at war with herself in many ways and trying to figure out what she thinks. But the victory is you can see in the stories where she’s going and what she thinks,” she added.
O’Donnell said that going forward, she hopes that Flannery O’Connor gets a fairer and more honest consideration than a cursory glance at some of her racist remarks in her personal letters.
At Loyola University Maryland, Flannery O’Connor’s name could be used on a more appropriate building, such as a literary arts building or theater, she noted.
“I would really just encourage people to read the stories and decide for themselves what O’Connor is doing,” O’Donnell said. “And also to understand that the things that she says in her letters are problematic. Absolutely, no question about it. Nobody is going to side step that.”
“But we don’t remember Flannery O’Connor for her letters. We remember her for her stories. That’s where we go when we have to decide whether that work is worth it. It’s a decision we have to make.”
[…]
I knew Francis II would say something dumb.
Ever satisfied?
Satisfaction is an evil thing to desire. So, no.
Leo’s comments were disheartening. As I hold to the Church’s traditional teaching on the death penalty, I suppose that means I can no longer consider myself pro-life.
Correct. Synodaling has freed you from your backwardist, reactionary, dogma loving, inadmissible ideologies. And it’s about time, since we are in year 12 of the Franciscus Church paradigm shift. Glad you are on board, but how did you miss the drone show?
Anyway, let’s summarize what we have learned from this latest Synodaling:
The death penalty is inadmissible and not pro-life.
The major award to Durbin is admissible and pro-life(ish;)💋
Mr. Cupich said this: ““The tragedy of our current situation in the United States is that Catholics find themselves politically homeless.”
It’s thinking like this that makes this man a particularly unworthy bishop. He simply is not thinking like a successor to the Apostles. It’s as if the first Apostles were in a quandary about which Roman senator ought to be the next Caesar. This is a bishop who does not think as Christ thinks. He thinks as Mammon.
I would suggest that cupich retire very quickly, repair to some Carthusian monastery and spend the remainder of his days in contemplation and repentance for what ill-effect his episcopacy has had on the faithful whom he was charged with shepherding.
You either support abortion or you don’t.
He did, he does and he will continue to do so – therefore he should NOT receive an award of any kind from The Cardinal – End of discussion.
Smart move by Durbin.
Agreed. As a professional politician, Durbin no longer needs the headache from this silly award or episcopal allies like Cupich. From today’s Gospel: Luke 9:60
Sadness equating illegal immigration into a bankrupt nation with the murder of Holy Innocents in the womb – largely financed by our government. The seamless garment has a big hole i its posterior portion.
Still praying for a Catholic Pope. No wonder Cdl Cupich was smirking on the loggia.
“We can move forward if we Keep Hope Alive.” Untrue in this life if you have been aborted.
Pope Leo said that “it’s important to look at many issues [OTHER THAN THE MASS MURDER OF CHILDREN] that are related to the teachings of the Church.” Leo is a miserable Franciscus II. Attempting to gaslight pro-life from a country palace after a dip in the pool just won’t do.
Well, at least Senator Durbin is a professional politician and knows when he is defeated. Praying for him to return to Holy Communion.
Well, at least we finally have a working definition of Synodaling:
Gatherings to change attitudes so that we can eventually change dogmas, like the Sixth Commandment. “We can move forward if we Keep Hope Alive.” Untrue in this life if you have been aborted.
Pope Leo said that “it’s important to look at many issues [OTHER THAN THE MASS MURDER OF CHILDREN] that are related to the teachings of the Church.” Leo is a miserable Franciscus II. Attempting to gaslight pro-life from a country palace after a dip in the pool just won’t do.
Well, at least Senator Durbin is a professional politician and knows when he is defeated. Praying for him to return to Holy Communion.
On a positive note, we finally have a working definition of Synodaling:
Gatherings to change attitudes so that we can eventually change dogmas, like the Sixth Commandment.
Well apart from the fact that the position Durbin espouses deserves “total condemnation,” not giving him an award is a completely neutral position, not condemnation. As for His Holiness, his statement was disappointing mush. I can certainly be read as allowing for the exact selective dissection of Durbin’s record to find justification for honoring him that Cupich was purporting.
Cupich, Leo & Company should surmise what sane Catholics think they can do with their “seamless garment.”
The murder of one million innocent unborn children is not in any way equivalent to the death penalty, properly administered, which is not a sin, as the Church taught for over 1900 years. Murder (abortion) however, is first on the Catechism’s list of sins that cry to heaven. If the pope, and bishops, all with years of Theology, Philosophy, and most with advanced degrees, cannot see that, then a lot has been wasted on their education.
As to inhumane treatment of illegals, I would refer the pope to last December when the Vatican instituted new penalties for illegal entry into the Vatican, of up to a $25,000 fine and up to Four years in jail. I ask, which is more humane, Four years in jail or deportation to a person’s country of origin?
In 2004 Pope Benedict, then Cardinal Ratzinger, said that unlike abortion and euthanasia, disagreeing with the Vatican on the death penalty was not a reason to refrain from receiving the Eucharist.
We all know what to expect from Cardinal Cupich, but how to react to the pope’s comments? Pathetic, outrageous, an embarrassment? After Pope Leo’s election I saw a lot of commenters ask the question as to whether we were getting a second Pope Leo XIII or Pope Francis 2.0. As time goes on I suppose the answer will be clear.
Deportment to country of a person’s origin? Not always so, not always a good idea if so!
It’s always a good idea to deport raping, murdering, and sex trafficking criminals convicted in their own country, to that country. Those simply deported back to their point of entry are a policing matter for that country, Mexico, espeically since their government aided and abetted the criminal entry into the U.S.
What’s next for the good bishop? Awarding Satan for keeping Jesus company in the desert?
Leo XIV expressed awareness of the difficulty and tensions, alluding to conflict of interests. Then added:
1 It’s important to look at the overall work that a senator has done. 2 It’s important to look at many issues that are related to the teachings of the Church.
As discussed elsewhere he responds to a conflict of interests between the sacred and the secular with a double bind. Was Pope Leo in favor or not?
If the one person with supreme authority leaves an important affirmation of Catholic doctrine hanging it is clear he is not affirming that doctrine as possessing priority over a secular interest.
Virtually all clergy from deacon, presbyter, bishop, cardinal, pope are afflicted with mealymouth disease. It can be cured. A painful chastisement from the heavens can do it. Or something like Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point for Catholic clergy would be more pleasant.
The men who were capable of a turning point moment among the cardinals: Muller, Eijk, Burke, Sarah, Zen, Woelki et Al were in an apparently smaller division but significant minority reason why an initial consensus could not be reached. The affable quiet man Cdl Prevost became the compromise choice.
At this stage the quiet man is turning out to be an affable conduit for the majority who favor Pope Francis’ ‘new paradigm’. Certainly Leo’s response was more amenable to soothing Cdl Cupich than true blue Catholic prelates like Paprocki. Durbin in the meantime bites the bullet and become a gaypride infantslayer folk hero.
Perfect analysis. Thank you, Father.
“Catholics find themselves politically homeless”??? Really?? I beg to differ.
I am 71 and have been voting Republican since I was 18. I NEVER miss an election. No one political party will reflect Catholic belief perfectly. These are secular groups, not religious ones, and will reflect a tolerant width of belief we may not always agree with 100%. HOWEVER there is an absolutely HUGE difference between the Democrats and Republicans. A blind man could see it. The Republicans have fought to get ROE repealed. They support law and order, respect our police and oppose perversion of sexual roles in society. They oppose foisting perverted sexuality on children in our schools. They oppose men in womens sports and locker rooms and bathrooms. By contrast the democrats SUPPORT all of those noxious positions, in addition to supporting the availability of abortion until the day of birth. The DEMS also gladly supported the influx of an estimated 20 million illegals into the country, far too many of whom are violent criminals. The Republicans support the closed border we have had since Trump returned to office.
Now, many “old guard” democrats have endorsed a socialist/communist mayoral candidate in NYC who is looking poised to win the election. We do recall what has happened in nations where Communists came into power, dont we? Christians were suppressed, churches closed, clergy jailed or murdered. That is what you are supporting when you vote DEM. Disgusting.
You can’t see the difference between the two??? Or are you just so self righteous that Trump’s occasionally abrasive personality has made you blind to reality, or blind to good and evil?? For those Catholics who persist in voting in the favor of the morally twisted Democrats, I have one word for you. It begins with “stu” and ends with “pid”.
I beg to differ if you consider a Republican form of government important. Unless you are blind, it’s hard not to see the erosion of balance of power in our present government. The Executive branch is trying to run the whole show. Judges and members of congress are being badgered and bullied into compliance. The Executive privilege is being abused on every front. The military is being micromanaged to the point that Generals jobs are being threatened if they dare to disagree. The sports and entertainment industries are being coerced. Businesses are being punished. Foreign governments are being bullied and their leaders personalities and reputations maligned. Law firms are being prevented from representing clients. The Educational freedoms at the local level are being taken over by the federal government (something Republicans were formally against), the Press is being badgered into what they can report. People’s very citizenship are being revoked. Even local libraries are being told what they can and cannot do. The medical and pharmaceutical industries are also being run by government agencies. We are being told what shots we can and cannot have. In short every facet of our lives are becoming controlled by the whims of one man. What kind of government is this? Is this what we want? Is this man really pro life? Is the end “Christian Nationalism “? If so do you really think that the word Christian will remain once other objectives are achieved? How long can you feel at home considering the present trajectory toward despotism? The offerings of the Left are equally scary and in no way can be acceptable to the Christian. Don’t label me as a leftist as I abhor their lack of sexual morality and lack of respect for family values. Both parties seek complete control of our lives by the State. I think that there is still room in the Center for a party which would more truly represent Christian values and would seek to gain them through ethical means.
“Don’t label me a leftist…” even though I speak like one and think like one 🙄. You forgot to include the obligatory comparison between Trump and Hitler in your post.
Athanasius: neither party is all good and all bad. If you combine the good of both and eliminate the bad of both you just may arrive at balanced solution to our problems. No one is all wrong, no person entirely evil. We can’t assume that a person’s motives are bad just because we disagree with what they stand for. Take a look at the platform of the American Solidarity Party as an example of the kind of possibility that I am suggesting. It was built entirely on the Teachings and Practices of the Catholic Church. Thomas Aquinas taught that virtue is found in the middle of the extremes. Where on the political continuum does the present Republican Party stand? How far right do you need to go before you become wrong? Is it farther right than it was 20 years ago? Thirty? Fifty? If so why? Is being far right good and healthy? I’m addressing you as one on the right because that is where you seem to be coming from, but I can ask the same questions to the present Democrats. I’m not saying that everything that the Republican Party stands for is bad. It isn’t. But the end never justifies the means and I am Very concerned about many of the MEANS that are being employed to gain these “good” ends. Despotic governments can achieve great things much faster and better than democratic ones. Just look at the great empires of the past- Mesopotamia , Egypt, Rome and Modern China- to only name a few. Not all work out this way though. What I am trying to point out is that things are getting done fast now , but this is not necessarily good. IF corners are being cut and due process is being violated, a red flag should be thrown up and we should stop and evaluate what is going on. Time to step back and take inventory. It’s never a bad idea to stop and ask questions and analyze a situation and see if we are possibly rationalizing. I am concerned because I have a feeling that many Christians are beginning to compromise values in order to reach seemingly good ends.
Jim, Your liberal bias comes through loud and clear.
I dont see that executive privilege is being abused. Trump is almost the only one getting anything done, as democrats take him to court over the most insignificant action, creating a huge roadblock to doing anything for the people.
Were you OK with the killing in Washington DC until Trump sent in troops? Or in Chicago where 58 people were recently killed but their mayor says everything is fine? Is he crazy? Honey, if you cant do your job as an elected official, get out of the way and let someone else do it. If it has to be Trump, so be it. This isnt politics, peoples LIVES are at stake.
The military is a place where chain of command is everything. You dont get to decide if you like your orders or chose not to obey them. If thats what you want to do, you are in the wrong job. A “do my own thing” military is the path to chaos. After years of DEI promotions and women who cant do the work, yes, I am glad the object is to have the fittest and strongest and most qualified in the jobs.
You think the press is being badgered, after years of being a propaganda tool for the Dem left? Thats funny? Were you blocked from posting online during the Biden years, because I WAS. I am still finding my very mild but conservative posts blocked on liberal run sites like AOL. So, I guess you were ok when they lied through their teeth for the left and never gave the conservative point of view?
Thus far to my knowledge NO ONE’S citizenship has been revoked. Thats propaganda. Trump joked about doing that to Rosie but to anyone with a sense of humor, they got the joke. JOKE, get it? Since she hates the country so much its doubtful she would mind anyway if it happened.
As for drag queen shows for children at libraries being stopped, good. I dont want my tax dollars used for perversion and indoctrination of children. The dems made an art of suing any lawyer who took Trump on as a client or having them disbarred. How is that not control, suppression, violence?? Now it comes full circle and the left is howling. Too bad.
I dont see us heading toward Christian Nationalism. Neither do I think such a thing would be threatening. I have no idea what supposed “objectives ” frighten you,( or what objectives you see lurking in the dark??) but the fake threatening world you have conjured up for yourself is a waste of energy. As far as I can see, it has been the left, which I do not distinguish from the DEMs or communists , who have destroyed the quality of life for average people, dangerous unvetted illegals and with partisan judges (who always need to be overruled),ignoring violent crime against innocents . You dont really believe that those charges against Trump under Biden were legit, do you?? Russia-gate has long been proven a dangerous farce too. As was every charge that followed.
Recently a medical professional confided that he was trying to visit Washington DC to see the African American Museum “before Trump shuts it down”. WHAT????? NO PLACE EVER has there been talk of such a thing happening. That is more propaganda, or outright hysteria. I am left to conclude that DEMs are either a little short in the IQ department, or have been so thoroughly propagandized that they can no longer see reality. Sad. I would not vote for a DEM at this point for a million dollars.
One final question. Which side do you imagine would be more than happy to outlaw religion? That pretty much says everything that needs to be said. If you are ok with the complete chaos that Dem/leftist rule represents, you have my sympathy.
Isn’t the Church entrusted with the mission to transform the world—not to be conformed to it? When individuals, particularly those in positions of public leadership, persist in advancing pro-choice policies, they bear a grave responsibility. Even if such actions are brought to confession, true repentance must be evident in a change of heart and conduct. The continued public promotion of abortion, absent sincere contrition, reveals a disconnect between professed faith and lived witness. In such cases, it is not only appropriate but necessary for the Church and its faithful to speak with clarity and courage—calling out moral inconsistency where it undermines the sanctity of life and the integrity of Christian witness.
John 8:11: Jesus tells the woman caught in adultery, “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more”.
John 5:14: Jesus also told a man he healed, “See, you have been made well. Stop sinning, or something worse may happen to you”.
Meaning of “Go and Sin No More”
Mercy and Forgiveness: The words are not a means of punishment but an expression of God’s love and grace, offering the woman a new life rather than condemnation.
Call to Repentance: It’s a command to abandon the sinful lifestyle and embrace a path of righteousness, purity, and holy living.
Transformation, Not Perfection: Jesus isn’t saying that the individual will never be tempted again or never stumble. Rather, through the power of the Holy Spirit, sin’s grip is broken, making sin no longer a lifestyle choice.
A New Beginning: Just as the woman’s life was saved, the phrase offers a chance for a new beginning, inviting the individual to be changed by God’s mercy.
Significance in Christian Theology
The phrase underscores that while God offers forgiveness for sin, this forgiveness is accompanied by the expectation of a changed life.
It highlights the transformative power of encountering Jesus, where true repentance and holiness become possible
No. Reform the individual. The World is given over to Satan.
Tickertape across the bottom of the screen this morning: Pope Backs Pro-Abortion Sen. Durbin for Award.
That’s all 99% of the public sees and hears.
Pope Leo is not talking to a crew of Augustinian Friars in the Chapter House. He is talking to lay people, non-Christian, non-Catholics, and an unsettling discouraging crew of Roman Catholics with either no catechesis or erroneous catechesis. The tickertape is totally accurate with them…no nuance, they got to get to work, to school, take care of the kids and pay the bills.
The dearth of vocations for the last sixty years has resulted in a dearth of men with leadership skills. The result of hard lessons not absorbed by the episcopate over that period are hitting the fan. It appears it is not going to get better until the episcopate have no sheep to shepherd and they are reaping the financial consequence that brings.
To compound matters we read at another source today that Pope Leo [along with Arnold Schwarzenegger] has no difficulty in saying it is time to swap words for “decisive and coordinated climate action” and does so without an iota of ambiguity.
It seems when he wishes Pope Leo can speak most clearly about a natural phenomenon which is outside of his expertise and which itself quite ambiguous. From whence the change in the weather? Its all quite theoretical at best. Every prediction of doom has not materialized, while it remains a crisis? I think not, nor do a sizeable portion of the world meteorologists who do not rely on leftist funding from dubious sources.
The Vatican had best stick to what is commonly assumed to be its field of expertise, theology, but these days even that is thrown to a consensus of synodal participants.
If Pope Leo is going to heal the divisions within the Church he had best start with himself.
Pope Leo should have a little fortitude.
“Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil,who change darkness to light, and light into darkness”.
Isaiah 5:20
A lifetime achievement award? “Amen I say to you, they have received their reward.”
The dark night of the soul continues as ‘men without chests’ seem to be our politically motivated shepherds.
The good Lord’s permissive will perhaps.
The Church awaits another Benedict of Nursia.