Heroic Agents of Change/Transformation 2009

Facing the Inquisition
A pope seeks pardon.
By Ivan J. Kauffman | DECEMBER 10, 2007
America, the Catholic magazine
Vol. 197 No.19,Whole No. 4797

With its vividly re-enacted scenes of torture, book burning and violence, the PBS series “Secret Files of the Inquisition” made clear that stereotypical views of the Inquisition are not going away anytime soon. It also ensured that a negative interpretation of this Catholic history will be embedded in popular culture, the history as told by those who view the Catholic Church as the foremost obstacle to everything modern and progressive.

Although advertised as based on recently opened Vatican archives, the series contained little that is new. Despite the interviews with Catholic historians, it ignored virtually all the recent scholarship that could have produced a much more complete view of the Inquisition. Its biggest omission, though, was ignoring the story of Pope John Paul II’s efforts to bring the Inquisition into the open. That effort constituted a major chapter in John Paul’s long, eventful papacy, yet it is little known even within Catholic circles.

Finding the Facts

When John Paul II came to Rome in 1978, he brought with him a deep awareness that two historical events—the condemnation of Galileo and the Inquisition—were essential to anti-Catholicism, and he was determined to deal with both.

In the first year of his papacy, the pope formed a commission to study the Galileo incident, asking the group to tell the church: “What happened? How did it happen? Why did it happen?” The commission issued a report 14 years later supporting neither the ecclesiastical right, which seems to hold that the Catholic Church can never err, nor the secular left, which seems to hold that the Catholic Church can do nothing right. John Paul said of the report, “Often, beyond two partial and conflicting perceptions, there exists a wider perception which includes them and goes beyond both of them.”

He addressed the Inquisition in the same way in 1994, including an inquiry into its history among the preparations for the Jubilee year 2000. In a memo outlining the plans, John Paul told the world’s cardinals that confessing institutional sin would be a prominent part of the event. “How can we be silent about so many kinds of violence perpetrated in the name of the faith?” he asked, specifically mentioning “religious wars, courts of the Inquisition, and other violations of the rights of the human person.” He went so far as to compare them to “the crimes of Hitler’s Nazism and Marxist Stalinism.”

“The church must on its own initiative examine the dark places of its history and judge it in the light of Gospel principles,” he wrote to the cardinals. “The church needs a metanoia,” he added, “a discernment of the historical faults and failures of her members in responding to the demands of the Gospel.” The memo was an internal document, which allowed John Paul to speak more directly than he would have in public, but it was leaked to the press—a rather rare event in Vatican circles—giving the public an uncommon glimpse into the pope’s thinking.

John Paul’s 1994 proposal did not meet with an enthusiastic reception by all the cardinals. Many Europeans saw it as aiding their longtime critics; many from Africa and Asia regarded the Inquisition as a European issue from the distant past that would only confuse their people and give ammunition to their enemies if an apology were aired at the papal level. Some more conservative cardinals were troubled by the doctrinal innovation it seemed to involve.

Despite these objections, voiced with unusual openness by several cardinals, John Paul proceeded. When the program for the Jubilee 2000 was announced later that year in the apostolic letter Tertio Millennio Adveniente, the issue of confessing the church’s past sins was prominent. “Acknowledging the weaknesses of the past,” it said, “alerts us to face today’s temptations and...prepares us to meet them.”

A Meeting of Minds

Georges Cottier, O.P., then the pope’s personal theologian, was asked to form a historical commission on the Inquisition modeled after the Galileo commission. He enlisted prominent scholars, Catholic and not, who were given complete freedom in their proceedings. The commission included 30 scholars from nine European nations and the United States and Canada.

When the commission met at the Vatican in October 1998, John Paul told members he could not take “an action based on ethical norms, which any request for pardon is, without first being informed of exactly what happened.” His first step was to ask historians to reconstruct the events of the Inquisition “within the context of that historical period.”

The appointment of the commission was largely ignored in the U.S. press, and even in those Catholic areas of Europe where it was reported, it was soon forgotten. For the next six years the effort appeared to have been quietly shelved. In 2004, however, the Vatican held a heavily promoted press conference, which included three cardinals, to announce that the papers from the 1998 conference had been published by the Vatican Press in its prestigious series Studi e Testi. To demonstrate that his Inquisition project had not been forgotten, John Paul issued a personal statement strongly supporting the publication. The overall tone of his message made rather clear that he regarded the actions of the Inquisition as contrary to the Gospel.

The book itself was a collection of papers written by experts, largely for other experts, and typical of the results of a scholarly conference. Its editorial matter and 10 of the 30 papers were in Italian, with other papers in French (11), Spanish (6) and English (3). The authors were major authorities in their fields. The papers ranged across the entire history of the Inquisition, from its origins in southern France in the 13th century to the development of the Spanish Inquisition in the 16th century, its institutionalization in Rome and its post-Reformation history.

The volume also included an effort by several Catholic scholars to acknowledge the essential sinfulness of the Inquisition. The commission included scholars who maintained the traditional belief that the negative effects of heresy on civil society were so great that capital punishment was justified, but on the whole the revolution in Catholic doctrine that took place at Vatican II when the “Declaration on Religious Liberty” was adopted prevailed in the reports. One author, for example, referred to the execution of heretics under Pope Pius V as “legal murder.” Jean-Miguel Garrigues, O.P., a member of the Pontifical Theological Academy, took both St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas to task in no uncertain terms for having provided the theological rationale for the Inquisition, and called their justification of religious coercion a prime example of the “ways of thinking and acting which were truly forms of counter-witness and scandal,” quoting John Paul’s words in Tertio Millennio Adveniente.

Despite all this, the book was virtually ignored in the United States. And while it received widespread coverage in Europe, a headline in the British paper The Guardian was typical: “Historians Say Inquisition Wasn’t That Bad.” That report claimed that Agostino Borromeo, the volume’s editor (and a Catholic commentator for the PBS series), had told reporters that “many executions attributed to the church ‘were in fact carried out by non-church tribunals.’” Of course, to many historians the distinction between declaring someone a heretic, knowing that doing so will result in her or his death, and actually executing that person might seem insignificant.

But the book’s primary significance lay less in its contents, valuable as they are, than in its history. That the Vatican would initiate an open-ended process in which previous popes and other high-ranking clerics would almost certainly be condemned—as indeed they were—was surely a historic event. In the 19th century, Pope Gregory XVI had called it “insulting” to “infer that the church could be subject to any defect.” Pope John Paul II obviously had a somewhat different perspective.

The Church’s Mea Culpa

In fact the Inquisition project was part of a larger effort that seems likely to gain significance in Catholic history as we acquire perspective on John Paul’s papacy. Almost from the start of his pontificate, John Paul began asking, in the name of the church, for forgiveness for actions taken by his predecessors. These included the role of Catholics in dividing Christianity, in promoting hatred of Jews, in mistreating Native Americans and in enslaving Africans, to mention only a few cases. The public apologies were chronicled by Luigi Accattoli, the Italian reporter who covered the pope for the Italian daily newspaper Corriere della Sera, and published in 1998 with the English title When A Pope Asks Forgiveness: The Mea Culpas of John Paul II.

John Paul’s apologies in effect subjected the Catholic Church to the same standards to which business corporations are now held in civil law, whereby corporations take responsibility for the decisions of officials no longer living and who had no way to know their actions would cause grave damage in the future.

This admission of fault stirred much controversy. In response John Paul asked Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to form a theological commission to study the issues involved. It was this commission’s report which provided the theological foundations for a historic penance service known as the Day of Pardon, which took place at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome on the first Sunday of Lent 2000.

At the press conference beforehand, the Vatican announced that “the church today, through the Successor of Peter,” would name and confess “the errors of Christians in every age,” including “acts of violence and oppression during the Crusades,” and the “methods of coercion employed in the Inquisition.”

John Paul was willing to admit that the sins of intolerance committed by Christians “in the name of faith and morals” had “[sullied] the face of the church.” Such an admission does not require acknowledging doctrinal error, since the Inquisition was never formally approved either by a council or an infallible papal declaration. It does, however, require abandoning dogmatic triumphalism. It also necessitates learning from the past. That requires us to face the facts, all the facts, fearlessly and honestly, and to ask why actions were taken by our predecessors which now shame us so deeply.

John Paul’s penitential initiative provides a way for Catholics to create a narrative of the Inquisition that tells the whole story, as opposed to any selective, biased account that Catholicism’s severest critics have fashioned or might fashion. That is the road John Paul has set us on, and surely it is the way to free us from this ghost in the Catholic closet.

Ivan J. Kauffman, of Washington, D.C., is a Catholic co-founder of Bridgefolk, a Mennonite and Catholic ecumenical group.

http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=10471

Galileo on Our Duty to Raise Loyal Questions:


Galileo Galilei
Tried by the Inquisition
 
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.

- Galileo

Vatican Rewrites History on Galileo
The Huffington Post
December 23, 2009
 
Galileo Galilei is going from heretic to hero.
 
The Vatican is recasting the most famous victim of its Inquisition as a man of faith, just in time for the 400th anniversary of Galileo's telescope and the U.N.-designated International Year of Astronomy next year.
 
 
 
Pope Benedict XVI paid tribute to the Italian astronomer and physicist Sunday, saying he and other scientists had helped the faithful better understand and "contemplate with gratitude the Lord's works."
 
In May, several Vatican officials will participate in an international conference to re-examine the Galileo affair, and top Vatican officials are now saying Galileo should be named the "patron" of the dialogue between faith and reason.
 
It's quite a reversal of fortune for Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), who made the first complete astronomical telescope and used it to gather evidence that the Earth revolved around the sun. Church teaching at the time placed Earth at the center of the universe.
 
The church denounced Galileo's theory as dangerous to the faith, but Galileo defied its warnings. Tried as a heretic in 1633 and forced to recant, he was sentenced to life imprisonment, later changed to house arrest.
 
The Church has for years been striving to shed its reputation for being hostile to science, in part by producing top-notch research out of its own telescope.
 
In 1992, Pope John Paul II declared that the ruling against Galileo was an error resulting from "tragic mutual incomprehension."
 
But that apparently wasn't enough. In January, Benedict canceled a speech at Rome's La Sapienza University after a group of professors, citing the Galileo episode and depicting Benedict as a religious figure opposed to science, argued that he shouldn't speak at a public university.
 
The Galileo anniversary appears to be giving the Vatican new impetus to put the matter to rest. In doing so, Vatican officials are stressing Galileo's faith as well as his science, to show the two are not mutually exclusive.
 
At a Vatican conference last month entitled "Science 400 Years after Galileo Galilei," the Vatican No. 2, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, said Galileo was an astronomer, but one who "lovingly cultivated his faith and his profound religious conviction."
 
"Galileo Galilei was a man of faith who saw nature as a book authored by God," Bertone said.
 
The head of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Culture, which co-sponsored the conference, went further. Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi told Vatican Radio that Galileo "could become for some the ideal patron for a dialogue between science and faith."
 
He said Galileo's writings offered a "path" to explore how faith and reason were not incompatible.
 
The Rev. John Padberg, a church historian and the director of the Institute of Jesuit Sources at St. Louis University, said he suspected the Vatican's new emphasis on Galileo's faith came from the pope himself.
 
"Pope Benedict XVI is ardently convinced of the congruence of faith and reason, and he is concerned, especially in the present circumstances, of giving reason its due place in the whole scheme of things," he said.
 
While it is widely accepted that Galileo was a convinced Catholic, Padberg questioned whether he could ever be accepted as some kind of a poster child for the faith and reason debate. "That's going to be a long shot for an awful lot of people, on both sides, by the way," he said.
 
Benedict, a theologian, has made exploring the faith-reason relationship a key aspect of his papacy, and has directed his daily newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, in particular, to take up the charge.
 
On Monday, the newspaper published a piece on the possibility of alien life on other planets as well as one on the popes who were "friendly" to astronomy.
 
Benedict clearly is: In his Sunday blessing, he noted that the Vatican itself has its own meridian -- an obelisk in St. Peter's Square -- and that astronomy had long been used to signal prayer times for the faithful.
But the Vatican's embrace of Galileo only goes so far.
 
There were plans earlier this year to give Galileo a permanent place of honor in the Vatican to mark the anniversary of his telescope: a statue, to be located inside the Vatican gardens, donated by the Italian aerospace giant Finmeccanica SpA.
 
The plans were suspended after some Vatican officials voiced "problems" with the initiative, said Nicola Cabibbo, the president of the Pontifical Council for Science. He declined to elaborate.
 
Finmeccanica spokesman Roberto Alatri said the Galileo statue was just an idea that never got off the ground.
 
Italian news reports suggested the Vatican simply didn't want to draw so much permanent attention to the Galileo episode, which 400 years on, still rankles some.
 
"The dramatic clash between Galileo and some men of the Church left wounds that are still open today," the Vatican's chief astronomer, the Rev. Jose Funes, wrote recently in Osservatore. "The Church in some ways has recognized its errors.
 
"Maybe it could do better. One can always do better," he wrote.
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/23/vatican-rewrites-history_n_153232.html?page=7&show_comment_id=19088044#comment_19088044

Dear friends, 

Is there a connection between the Galileo saga and the case for women priests?

Quite simply: Yes. 

Defenders of the Vatican prohibition of women priests argue that:

• the exclusion of women from the priesthood has been a constant throughout Church history.  It has always been Church teaching.
  
• the Vatican says it must be so. The Vatican does not make mistakes.

While at first blush, these might seem like good points, when considered in the light of the facts, these arguments do not carry the weight proponents of an exclusively male priesthood try to contend that they do. 


Galileo

The Facts:

Ecclesiastical history is clear.  The Vatican does not always get things 'right.' There are many instances which show that as consciences are illuminated by Christ's light and understanding becomes clear, evolutions happen in Church teachings which serve to bring our faith community into closer communion with Christ's way.

The Galileo case provides a striking example.  The Vatican crushed what it saw as Galileo's challenge to accepted 'world' order.  Today it accepts this was wrong.  Insisting it is authoritatively, definitively 'right' and later it admits it is wrong?  Throughout Church history, there are many examples of Vatican  adamantly insisting that what it says is in accord with divine and natural law... only later to be proven as wrong.

Because of the courageous work of agents for change -- the glaring errors on the part of the Vatican become clearly evident.   Slowly, reluctantly, the Vatican adapts and introduces the changes needed to bring Church law and teaching into accord with what is right:

• 1614:    Galileo is accused of heresy for his support of the Copernican theory that the sun was at the centre of the solar system. This theory was revolutionary since most people (including the Vatican) believed the Earth was in this central position.
  
• 1633:     Galileo Galilei is tried before the Inquisition for teaching that the Earth orbits the Sun.  He is formally interrogated for 18 days.  On April 30 Galileo confesses that he may have made the Copernican case in the Dialogue too strong and offers to refute it in his next book. Unmoved, the Pope decides that Galileo should be imprisoned indefinitely. Soon after, with a formal threat of torture, Galileo is examined by the Inquisition and sentenced to prison and religious penances, the sentence is signed by 6 of the 10 inquisitors. In a formal ceremony at a the church of Santa Maria Sofia Minerva, Galileo abjures his errors. He is then put in house arrest in Sienna. After these tribulations he begins writing his Discourse on Two New Sciences.
  
• Galileo remained under house arrest, despite many medical problems and a deteriorating state of health, until his death in 1642.
  
• 1983:     The Vatican finally accepted that Galileo might be right. Pope John Paul II reverses the Vatican's 1633 condemnation of Galileo
  
• 1992:     The Vatican frankly admits mistakes with respect to Galileo.

 
Galileo and the Inquisition

The implications for women's ordination?  Through an evolution in appreciation for what is True -- our Church is learning that the exclusion of women from priesthood is not of God. It is offensive to human dignity. Exclusion of women,  like the condemnation of Galileo, constitutes a serious error on the part of teaching authority.

The Galileo case not the only example where an evolution in understanding has occurred. Our library is an effective resource for learning more. I invite you to click here to learn out more about:

• serious mistakes
  
• 65 Church teachings once held to be authoritive and which have now changed!
  
• Culture Shift
  
• The Facts
  
• Lessons from History
  
• The Dynamics of Change

Because our Church does show a capacity to embrace necessary evolutions in teachings  so as to journey more closely with Truth, we know our Church has the capacity to move forward with teachings about women's ordination, too.  While Truth never changes, it is clear that our Church leaders have not always had a grasp on what's True.

Without saying more, considering our history, the attempt to defend the exclusion of women from Holy Orders on the basis that: 'This is the way it always has been' is a weak argument if there ever was one.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

with love and blessings,

~Sophie~

Born February 15 in 1820 - Susan B. Anthony, American suffragist (d. 1906)


Susan Brownell Anthony
Age 28
 
Susan Brownell Anthony (1820-1906) was a prominent, independent and well-educated American civil rights leader who played a pivotal role in the nineteenth century women's rights movement to secure women's suffrage in the United States. She traveled the United States and Europe, and gave 75 to 100 speeches per year on women's rights for some 45 years. Susan B. Anthony died in Rochester, New York in 1906.
 
Early Life
 
Susan Brownell Anthony was the second of 8 children born to Daniel Anthony and Lucy Read. One of her brothers, publisher Daniel Read Anthony, would become active in the anti-slavery movement in Kansas. She was a precocious child, having learned to read and write at age three. Her father, a cotton manufacturer and abolitionist, was a stern but open-minded man who was born into the Quaker religion. Her mother was a student in Daniel's school when she and Daniel fell in love. Although Lucy readily agreed to marry Daniel in 1817, she was less sure about marrying into the Society of Friends (Quakers). She was not a convinced Quaker and claimed that she was “not good enough” for the religion. In 1826, when the Quakers split into liberal and conservative camps, the Anthonys quickly followed the liberals, known as the "Hicksite Friends"—a group named after Elias Hicks.  

Susan B. Anthony

Susan B. Anthony's Court speech on women's right to vote

Anthony recited a now famous speech before the court, in defense of women's suffrage. The following is a summary of her remarks:



Susan B. Anthony

Friends and fellow citizens: I stand before you tonight under indictment for the alleged crime of having voted at the last presidential election, without having a lawful right to vote. It shall be my work this evening to prove to you that in thus voting, I not only committed no crime, but, instead, simply exercised my citizen's rights, guaranteed to me and all United States citizens by the National Constitution, beyond the power of any state to deny.

The preamble of the Federal Constitution says: "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union. And we formed it, not to give the blessings of liberty, but to secure them; not to the half of ourselves and the half of our posterity, but to the whole people - women as well as men. And it is a downright mockery to talk to women of their enjoyment of the blessings of liberty while they are denied the use of the only means of securing them provided by this democratic-republican government - the ballot.

For any state to make sex a qualification that must ever result in the disfranchisement of one entire half of the people, is to pass a bill of attainder, or, an ex post facto law, and is therefore a violation of the supreme law of the land. By it the blessings of liberty are forever withheld from women and their female posterity. To them this government has no just powers derived from the consent of the governed. To them this government is not a democracy. It is not a republic. It is an odious aristocracy; a hateful oligarchy of sex; the most hateful aristocracy ever established on the face of the globe; an oligarchy of wealth, where the rich govern the poor. An oligarchy of learning, where the educated govern the ignorant, or even an oligarchy of race, where the Saxon rules the African, might be endured; but this oligarchy of sex, which makes father, brothers, husband, sons, the oligarchs over the mother and sisters, the wife and daughters, of every household - which ordains all men sovereigns, all women subjects, carries dissension, discord, and rebellion into every home of the nation.

Webster, Worcester, and Bouvier all define a citizen to be a person in the United States, entitled to vote and hold office. The only question left to be settled now is: Are women persons? And I hardly believe any of our opponents will have the hardihood to say they are not. Being persons, then, women are citizens; and no state has a right to make any law, or to enforce any old law, that shall abridge their privileges or immunities.

Hence, every discrimination against women in the constitutions and laws of the several states is today null and void, precisely as is every one against Negroes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_B._Anthony

 






[Susan B. Anthony] took a socially unthinkable idea and stuck to it, refusing to listen to anyone who tried to lead her away from her chosen path. Her mindset never wavered, despite the wall of disapproval she constantly ran up against. Like so many progressives from history, she was not the only person to share in her beliefs; thousands, maybe millions of men and women across the world were thinking exactly the same thing.
What made her different was that she had the guts to do something about it.

http://www.fyne.co.uk/index.php?item=227

Susan Brownell Anthony was born into a devout Quaker family in 1820’s Massachusetts. Her father, Daniel, was a successful cotton producer who had strong ideas on slavery, temperance and the role of women. Although strict with his children (they were not allowed a single toy), his views were far from conservative. The female children of the family were cultivated into society on an equal par with their male counterparts and Daniel insisted that his daughters should be educated in the same way as any son would be. This advantage benefited Anthony’s intellectual skills and by the age of three, she could already read and write. By the age of five, she was well versed on the temperance and abolitionist movements and was even starting to formulate her own ideas on the subjects. Already, she was developing her iconic stubborn character and hard-line radical edge.

Her first foray into activism came when she seven years old. Like many schools of the time, boys were taught differently from girls, even though they sat in the same classroom. When the teacher began a class of long division for the boys, Anthony objected. She too wanted to learn. However, the teacher pointed out that as long division would never be of use to a woman counting her housekeeping money, it would be a waste of time to teach them the discipline. Anthony marched across the room and stood behind the teacher in a defiant mood, intending to watch over his shoulder as he opened his book to teach. For the act, Anthony was asked to leave and never return. Proud of his daughter’s stand, her father decided to teach her, and any other children who wanted a fair education, in a small room at the back of the house.

http://www.fyne.co.uk/index.php?item=227

With the 1872 elections looming, Anthony decided to take a stand and register to vote. Amazingly (even to her) Anthony’s registration was accepted. When the day of the election arrived, she marched along to the polling office to cast her vote. After some arguing around the ballot box, she was finally allowed to cast her vote, the first ever for an American woman. She left for home, feeling as though the fight for women’s suffrage was at last over. But alas, thirteen days later, her home was raided and she was arrested. Anthony instantly put in a plea of ‘not guilty’ to the charge of illegal voting.

The subsequent trial was a farce. Not only was Anthony denied the right to testify (she did manage to give a short speech after the verdict, accompanied by constant protests from the judge) but the jury were also advised by the presiding judge to return a guilty verdict. They duly did so and Anthony was ordered to pay a fine... She openly refused to pay a single cent of the ‘unjust’ fine but her attorney, a great supporter of her cause, paid it for her. Anthony did petition Congress for her conviction to be dismissed, but no reply ever came.

Losing the case was not a crushing failure for women’s suffrage. The issue was suddenly thrust into the limelight and Anthony became the representative of women’s rights throughout the country. With help from Stanton, Anthony set off across the country to embark on a series of lectures explaining her theory on women’s voting rights in America. Four years later, the attempt to get an amendment through Congress began.

In 1878 Senator Arlen A. Sargent introduced a self-written amendment to Congress that would ultimately remove the ban on female votes. Congress taunted and sneered at the suggestion and it was soon dismissed. Little did they know that only a few years later, Sargent’s very wording would become part of the USA’s Constitution. Anthony and her allies pushed on and at last, a few years later, the issue received a vote in Congress. The vote did not go Anthony’s way and women’s suffrage was defeated by 34 to 16.



As Anthony’s body began to fail with age, she turned her attention to instilling the desire to fight into the next generation, knowing that she would never live to cast a legal vote. But her input was not needed. All across America, women had become inspired by Anthony and had taken on the cause themselves. Far too many women were now demanding suffrage for the issue to ever slide away into obscurity. The last ever words publicly spoken by Anthony summed up her view of the future; “failure is impossible”. Her words became a mantra for the feminist movement in the USA, the rumbles of which are still audible today.

Anthony died from heart complications at her family home in Rochester on March 13, 1906. Over 10,000 men, women and children attended her funeral. Fourteen years after her death, the 19th Amendment, which allows all citizens to vote regardless of gender, was passed by Congress. Naturally, the legislation was nicknamed the Anthony Amendment, a fitting legacy for a woman who devoted her life to that simple, yet so important, few words of change on the country’s statute books.

With her life story in mind, it is still difficult to see Anthony in a photo as anything other than a strict, traditional, old lady. The words ‘radical’ or ‘hippie’ still don’t seem to fit. Maybe it is because for those of us here today, her ideas don’t appear to be leading edge at all. Of course women can be doctors, solicitors or bankers. Of course they can have their own bank accounts and look after their own financial affairs. Of course they can vote. But however unremarkable this lady looks in her photos, however accepted her ideas are today, without activists such as Anthony, women today would have very few of the rights which we simply take for granted. Anthony didn’t just help to win women the vote; she changed a nation’s preconceptions about the hierarchy of human life. Despite her traditional looks, she was far more radical and achieved far more than any dread-locked, pierced, vegan hippie of today.

http://www.fyne.co.uk/index.php?item=227

OBITUARY
Miss Susan B. Anthony Died This Morning
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
March 13, 1906

ROCHESTER, March 13, -- Miss Susan B. Anthony died at 12:40 o'clock this morning. The end came peacefully. Miss Anthony had been unconscious practically all of the time for more than twenty-four hours, and her death had been almost momentarily expected since last night. Only her wonderful constitution kept her alive.

Dr. M. S. Ricker, her attending physician, said Miss Anthony died of heart disease and pneumonia of both lungs. She had had serious valvular heart trouble for the last six or seven years. Her lungs were practically clear and the pneumonia had yielded to treatment, but the weakness of her heart prevented her recovery.

Miss Anthony was taken ill while on her way home from the National Suffrage Convention in Baltimore. She stopped in New York, where a banquet was to be given Feb. 20 in honor of her eighty-sixth birthday, but she had an attack of neuralgia on Feb. 18 and hastened home. Pneumonia developed after her arrival here, and on March 5 both her lungs became affected. She rallied, but had a relapse three days ago, and the end after that never was in doubt.

Miss Anthony herself had believed that she would recover. Early in her illness she told her friends that she expected to live to be as old as her father, who was over 90 when he died. But on Wednesday she said to her sister:

Write to Anna Shaw immediately, and tell her I desire that every cent I leave when I pass out of this life shall be given to the fund which Miss Thomas and Miss Garrett are raising for the cause. I have given my life and all I am to it, and now I want my last act to be to give it all I have, to the last cent. Tell Anna Shaw to see that this is done.

Miss Shaw said:

On Sunday, about two hours before she became unconscious, I talked with Miss Anthony, and she said: 'To think I have had more than sixty years of hard struggle for a little liberty, and then to die without it seems so cruel.

Susan Brownell Anthony was a pioneer leader of the cause of woman suffrage, and her energy was tireless in working for what she considered to be the best interests of womankind. At home and abroad she had innumerable friends, not only among those who sympathized with her views, but among those who held opinions radically opposed to her. In recent years her age made it impossible for her to continue active participation in all the movements for the enfranchisement of women with which she had been connected, but she was at the time of her death the Honorary President of the National Woman Suffrage Association, the society which she and Elizabeth Cady Stanton organized in 1869.

Miss Anthony possessed a figure of medium size, a firm but rather pleasing face, clear hazel eyes, and dark hair which she always wore combed smoothly over the ears and bound in a coil at the back. She paid much attention to dress and advised those associated in the movement for women suffrage to be punctilious in all matters pertaining to the toilet. For a little over a year in the early fifties she wore a bloomer costume, consisting of a short skirt and a pair of Turkish trousers gathered at the ankles. So great an outcry arose against the innovation both from the pulpit and the press that she was subjected to many indignities, and forced to abandon it.

Miss Anthony was born at South Adams, Mass., on Feb. 15, 1820. Daniel Anthony, her father, a liberal Quaker, was a cotton manufacturer. Susan Anthony was first instructed by teachers at home. She was sent afterward to finish her education at a Friends' boarding school in Philadelphia. She continued to attend this school until, at the age of fifteen, she was occasionally called on to help in the teaching. At seventeen she received a dollar a week with board by teaching in a private family, and the next summer a district school engaged her for $1.50 a week and "boarded her round." She continued to teach until 1852, when she found her taste for this profession entirely gone, a school in Rochester being her last charge.

Miss Anthony had become impressed with the idea that women were suffering great wrongs, and when she abandoned school teaching, having saved only about $300, she determined to enter the lecture field. People of to-day can scarcely understand the strong prejudices Miss Anthony had to live down. In 1851 she called a temperance convention in Albany, admittance to a previous convention having been refused to her because it was not the custom to admit women. The Women's New York State Temperance Society was organized the following year. Through Miss Anthony's exertions and those of Elizabeth Cady Stanton women soon came to be admitted to educational and other conventions, with the right to speak, vote, and act upon committees.

Miss Anthony's active participation in the movement for woman suffrage started in the fifties. As early as 1854 she arranged conventions throughout the State and annually bombarded the Legislature with messages and appeals. She was active in obtaining the passage of the act of the New York Legislature in 1860 giving to married women the possession of their earnings and the guardianship of their children. During the war she was devoted to the Women's Loyal League, which petitioned Congress in favor of the thirteenth amendment. She was also directly interested in the fourteenth amendment, sending a petition in favor of leaving out the word "male."

In company with Mrs. Stanton and Lucy Stone, Miss Anthony went to Kansas in 1867, and there obtained 9,000 votes in favor of woman suffrage. The following year, with the co-operation of Mrs. Stanton, Parker Pillsbury, and George Francis Train, she began the publication in this city of a weekly paper called The Revolutionist, devoted to the emancipation of women.

In order to test the application of the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments she cast ballots in the State and Congressional election in Rochester in 1872. She was indicted and ordered to pay a fine, but the order was never enforced.

Miss Anthony succeeded Mrs. Stanton as President of the National Woman Suffrage Association in 1892, Mrs. Stanton having resigned because of old age. This office she held until February, 1899, her farewell address being delivered at a meeting of the association in Washington. For a number of years she averaged 100 lectures a year. She engaged in eight different State campaigns for a Constitutional amendment enfranchising women, and hearings before committees of practically every Congress since 1869 were granted to her.

She was the joint author with Mrs. Stanton, Mrs. Ida Husted Harper, and Mrs. Matilda Joslyn Gage of "The History of Woman Suffrage." She also was a frequent contributor to magazines.

http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0215.html

Born this day February 15 in 1910 - Irena Sendler, Polish social worker (d. 2008)

Irena Sendler (in Polish also: Irena Sendlerowa; de domo Krzyżanowska; February 15, 1910 - May 12, 2008 ) was a Polish Catholic social worker. During World War II, she was a member of the Polish Underground and the Żegota resistance organization in Warsaw. Sendler saved 2,500 Jewish children by smuggling them out of the Warsaw Ghetto, providing false documents and sheltering them in individual or group children's homes outside the ghetto. Her story was brought to light when students from Kansas found her story in a magazine and popularized it in a play, titled "Life in a Jar."


Irene Sendler

Early Life

Irena sympathized with Jews since childhood; her father, a medical doctor, had died from typhus in 1917, treating Jewish patients. She opposed the ghetto benches, and as a pro-Jewish activist was for 3 years suspended from the Warsaw University.

World War II resistance
 
During the World War II German occupation of Poland, Sendler lived in Warsaw (prior to that, she lived in Otwock and Tarczyn) while working for urban Social Welfare Departments. As early as 1939, when the Germans invaded Poland, she began helping Jews by baking cookies and giving them piggy back rides. Irena and her helpers created over 3,000 false documents to help Jewish families, prior to joining the organized resistance of Żegota and the children's division. Helping Jews was very risky—in German-occupied Poland, all household members risked the death sentence if they were found to be hiding any Jews, a more severe punishment than in other occupied European countries.


Jewish Children in the Warsaw Ghetto

In December 1942, the newly created Children's Section of the Żegota (Council for Aid to Jews), nominated her (under her cover name Jolanta) to head its children's department. As an employee of the Social Welfare Department, she had a special permit to enter the Warsaw Ghetto, to check for signs of typhus, something the Nazis feared would spread beyond the ghetto. During these visits, she wore a Star of David as a sign of solidarity with the Jewish people and so as not to call attention to herself.

She cooperated with the Children's Section of the Municipal Administration, linked with the RGO (Central Welfare Council), a Polish relief organization tolerated under German supervision. She organized the smuggling of Jewish children from the ghetto, carrying them out in boxes, suitcases and trolleys. Under the pretext of conducting inspections of sanitary conditions during a typhoid outbreak, Sendler visited the ghetto and smuggled out babies and small children in ambulances and trams, sometimes disguising them as packages. She also used the old courthouse at the edge of the Warsaw Ghetto (still standing) as one of the main routes of smuggling children out. The children were placed with Polish families, the Warsaw orphanage of the Sisters of the Family of Mary or Roman Catholic convents such as the Little Sister Servants of the Blessed Virgin Mary Conceived Immaculate at Turkowice and Chotomów. Some were smuggled to priests in parish rectories. She hid lists of their names in jars in order to keep track of their original and new identities. Żegota assured the children that, when the war was over, they would be returned to Jewish relatives.


Nazi German poster in German and Polish (Warsaw, 1942) threatening death to any Pole who aided Jews
 
In 1943, Sendler was arrested by the Gestapo, severely tortured, and sentenced to death. Żegota saved her by bribing German guards on the way to her execution. She was left in the woods, unconscious and with broken arms and legs. She was listed on public bulletin boards as among those executed. For the remainder of the war, she lived in hiding, but continued her work for the Jewish children. After the war, she dug up the jars containing the children's identities and attempted to find the children and return them to their parents. However, almost all of their parents had been killed at the Treblinka extermination camp or had gone missing otherwise.

Post War Awards

After the war, she was at first persecuted by the communist Polish state authorities, for being related to the "capitalist and bourgeois" Polish government in exile and for her association with the "reactionary" Armia Krajowa Polish anti-Nazi resistance groups. She was imprisoned, miscarried her second child, and her children were denied the right to study at Polish universities.
 
In 1965, Sendler was recognized by Yad Vashem as one of the Righteous Among the Nations, which was confirmed in 1983 by the Israeli Supreme Court. She also was awarded the Commanders Cross by the Israeli Institute. It was only that year that the Polish commust government allowed her to travel abroad, to receive the award in Israel.


Sendler with some of the "children" she saved, in Warsaw, 2005.

In 2003, Pope John Paul II sent a personal letter to Sendler, praising her wartime efforts. On October 10, 2003, Sendler received the Order of the White Eagle, Poland's highest civilian decoration and the Jan Karski Award "For Courage and Heart," given by the American Center of Polish Culture in Washington, DC. On March 14, 2007 Sendler was honored by Poland's Senate. At age 97, she was unable to leave her nursing home to receive the honor, but she sent a statement through Elżbieta Ficowska, whom Sendler had saved as an infant. Polish President Lech Kaczyński stated that she "can justly be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize" (though nominations are supposed to be kept secret).

Sendler was the last survivor of the Children's Section of the Żegota Council for Assistance to the Jews, which she had headed from January 1943 until the end of World War II.

Nobel nominee
 
In 2007, considerable publicity accompanied Sendler's nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. While failed nominees for the award are not officially announced by the Nobel organization for 50 years, the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo reported in 2007 that Irena Sendler's nominator made public the nomination.  Regardless of its legitimacy, talk of this nomination focused the spotlight on Sendler and her wartime contribution. The 2007 award was presented to Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Life in a Jar
 
In 1999, Megan Stewart and her friends were inspired, by their high school history teacher Norman Conard in southeast Kansas, to investigate a small clipping on the life of an unsung hero, Irena Sendler. When the students began their research, they found one website which mentioned her. Based on their findings, the students created a play, Life in a Jar (after her hiding place for documents). After ten years, their play and the subsequent media attention had made her world famous.


Sendler's tree at Yad Vashem

As of August 2008, there have been over 250 performances: first in Kansas, then throughout the United States and Canada, and later in Europe. The students (now young men and women in their mid 20s) continue to share her story with the world. They made six trips to Poland to visit her before she died on May 12, 2008. The cast visited Irena in Warsaw a week before her death. Irena's final words to them, “You have changed Poland, you have changed the United States, you have changed the world (by bringing Irena’s story to light). Poland has seen great changes in Holocaust education, in the perception of the time and have provided a grand hero for their country and the world. I love you very, very much.”

The students have collected over 4000 pages of research on Irena's life and those she worked with during the war. More than 100 colleges and universities use material gathered by the project members for class instruction. She told the students in 2002, "You cannot separate people based on their race or religion. You can only separate people by good and evil. The good will always triumph."

Life in a Jar/The Irena Sendler Project has created a teachers award in the United States and Poland for the outstanding teacher in Holocaust Education. The members of the project are now working with the Children of the Holocaust Organization in Warsaw on the establishment of a statue in her honor to be completed on her birthday in 2010.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irena_Sendler

 
 
 
 
 
 
Quiet Heroine Irena Sendler

Irena Sendler was an elderly, relatively unknown Polish social worker until four teenagers from Kansas in search of a National History Day project discovered what she had done. Sendler had helped to rescue 2,500 Jewish children from the Warsaw Ghetto during World War II, before being captured and sentenced to die. But she escaped and lived quietly until the students found her and wrote a play about her. Sendler died on May 12, 2008, aged 98 years. Photos here are courtesy of the Web site http://www.irenasendler.org, where more than 250 images can be viewed. See Quiet Heroine Irena Sendler, 1910–2008 for Silver Planet's tribute to this remarkable woman

Smuggling Children out of the Ghetto
Irena Sendler
Poland

 
Irena Sendler

When World War II broke out, Irena Sendler was a 29-year-old social worker, employed by the Welfare Department of the Warsaw municipality.
 
After the German occupation, the department continued to take care of the great number of poor and dispossessed people in the city. Irena Sendler took advantage of her job in order to help the Jews, however this became practically impossible once the ghetto was sealed off in November 1940. Close to 400,000 people had been driven into the small area that had been allocated to the ghetto, and their situation soon deteriorated.
 
The poor hygienic conditions in the crowded ghetto, the lack of food and medical supplies resulted in epidemics and high death rates. Irena Sendler, at great personal danger, devised means to get into the ghetto and help the dying Jews. She managed to obtain a permit from the municipality that enabled her to enter the ghetto to inspect the sanitary conditions. Once inside the ghetto, she established contact with activists of the Jewish welfare organization and began to help them. She helped smuggle Jews out of the ghetto to the Aryan side and helped set up hiding places for them.

When the Council for Aid of Jews (Zegota) was established, Sendler became one of its main activists. The Council was created in fall 1942, after 280,000 Jews were deported from Warsaw to Treblinka. When it began to function towards the end of the year, most of the Jews of Warsaw had been killed. But it played a crucial role in the rescue of a large number who had survived the massive deportations. The organization took care of thousands of Jews who were trying to survive in hiding, seeking hiding places, and paying for the upkeep and medical care.

In September 1943, four months after the Warsaw ghetto was completely destroyed, Sendler was appointed director of Zegota’s Department for the Care of Jewish Children. Sendler, whose underground name was Jolanta, exploited her contacts with orphanages and institutes for abandoned children, to send Jewish children there. Many of the children were sent to the Rodzina Marii (Family of Mary) Orphanage in Warsaw, and to religious institutions run by nuns in nearby Chomotow, and in Turkowice, near Lublin. The exact number of children saved by Sendler and her partners is unknown.

On 20 October 1943, Sendler was arrested. She managed to stash away incriminating evidence such as the coded addresses of children in care of Zegota and large sums of money to pay to those who helped Jews. She was sentenced to death and sent to the infamous Pawiak prison, but underground activists managed to bribe officials to release her. Her close encounter with death did not deter her from continuing her activity. After her release in February 1944, even though she knew that the authorities were keeping an eye on her, Sendler continued her underground activities. Because of the danger she had to go into hiding. The necessities of her clandestine life prevented her from attending her mother's funeral.

On October 19, 1965, Yad Vashem recognized Irena Sendler as Righteous Among the Nations. The tree planted in her honor stands at the entrance to the Avenue of the Righteous Among the Nations.
 
http://www1.yadvashem.org/righteous_new/poland/sendler.html

Irena at Yad Vashem

Born this day February 15 in 1935 - Susan Brownmiller, American feminist and writer
 


Susan Brownmiller is a radical feminist, journalist, and activist. She is best known for her pioneering work on the politics of rape in her 1975 book Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape Brownmiller argues that rape had been hitherto defined by men rather than women; and that men use, and all men benefit from the use of, rape as a means of perpetuating male dominance by keeping all women in a state of fear. In 1995 The New York Public Library selected Against Our Will as one of 100 most important books of the Twentieth Century. Brownmiller also participated in civil rights activism, joining CORE and SNCC during the sit-in movement and volunteering for Freedom Summer in 1964, where she worked on voter registration in Meridian, Mississippi. Returning to New York, she began writing for The Village Voice and became a network TV newswriter at the American Broadcasting Company, a job she held until 1968. She first became involved in the Women's Liberation Movement in New York City in 1968, by joining a consciousness-raising group in the newly-formed New York Radical Women organization. Brownmiller went on to co-ordinate a si-in against Ladies' Home Journal in 1970, began work on Against Our Will after a New York Radical Feminists speak-out on rape in 1971, and co-founded Women Against Pornography in 1979. She continues to write and speak on feminist issues, including a recent memoir and history of Second Wave radical feminism. In Our Time: Memoir of a Revolution (1999).

As of 2005, she is an Adjunct Professor of Women's & Gender Studies at Pace University in New York City.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Brownmiller

Assassinated February 15 in 1992 - María Elena Moyano, Peruvian community organiser and women's activist (b. 1960)
 
María Elena Moyano Delgado (1960-1992) was a  Peruvian community organizer and activist of Afro-Peruvian descent who was assassinated by the maoist Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso) insurgent movement.
 
Although only one of many atrocities committed during the most violent period of Peru's modern history, her death resulted in a public outcry.
 

María Elena Moyano
 
Moyano was born in the Barranco district of Lima. Her activism began in her teens, as a member of the Movimiento de Jóvenes Pobladores, a youth movement in Villa El Salvador, a vast shantytown (pueblo joven) on the outskirts of the capital, largely populated by migrants from the interior of the country.
 
In 1984, at age 24, she was elected president of the Federación Popular de Mujeres de Villa El Salvador (Fepomuves), a federation of women from Villa El Salvador. Under her leadership, it grew to encompass public kitchens, health committees, the Vaso de Leche program (which supplied children with milk), income-generating projects, and committees for basic education. In 1990, Moyano left her position in Fepomuves and shortly thereafter was elected deputy mayor of the municipality of Villa el Salvador.
 
Shining Path inside Lima
 
At this time, Shining Path was trying to consolidate its hold on the poorer neighborhoods of Lima, and the circumstances obliged local political leaders to not make a firm commitment towards the grassroots organizations but to also take a principled stand on and pronounce a clear condemnation of terrorist methods.
 
Shining Path was particularly suspicious of women's organizations, which it accused of reformism, of collaboration with the government, and of opportunism; in short, of betraying the revolution as envisaged by Abimael Guzmán and other the leaders of the organization.
 
In mid-1991, Shining Path began an open attack on popular women leaders in Lima. In September, Juana López, coordinator of the Vaso de Leche program in the Carmen de la Legua Reynoso district of Callao, was murdered after she had denounced the presence and activity of Sendero in the neighborhood. Protestors took to the streets to denounce and repudiate the methods of Sendero. Moyano was a speaker at the final gathering, strongly condemning what she considerated the terrorist activities of Sendero as threatening the very existence of the country.
 
Death
 
Shining Path, however, eventually caught up with Moyano. On February 15, 1992, during a fund-raising rally in Villa El Salvador, in the presence of her two children and other onlookers, she was machine-gunned to death and her corpse blown up with dynamite.
 
Thousands of people attended her funeral. Later, in a plaza in the center of Villa El Salvador, a statue honoring Moyano was erected, and her autobiography was published.
 
The assassination of Moyano was one of the last major atrocities carried out by Shining Path. In September 1992, Guzmán was arrested and the leadership of the organization fell shortly thereafter. Subsequently, Shining Path was largely eradicated.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar%C3%ADa_Elena_Moyano

Book Review
 
The Autobiography of Maria Elena Moyano: The Life and Death of a Peruvian Activist
Edited and annotated by Diana Milosavich Tupac
Translated (with a prologue and afterword)
by Patricia S. Taylor Edmisten (Peru 1962–64)
Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida
128 pages
October 2000
Reviewed by Mark Brazaitis (Guatemala 1991–93)
 
THERE’S A TRAGIC MORAL TO THE LIFE of María Elena Moyano: all acts in a war-torn country are political. The moral is illustrated in Moyano’s autobiography, which details her efforts on behalf of Peruvian women and her death at the hands of Shining Path guerrillas.
 

 
If Moyano had been born in the United States, her life would have followed the script of the American Dream: Grow up in a shack, graduate from high school, marry, become a leading advocate of women’s rights, appear on the Oprah Winfrey show.
 
But Moyano was born in Peru, and her story had a different ending — and no appearance on “Oprah.” After rising from an impoverished background, Moyano was twice elected president of the Popular Women’s Federation of Villa El Salvador, and she was one of the main organizers of Vaso de Leche, a program that aimed to ensure that every child drank at least one glass of milk a day. In addition, Moyano was instrumental in setting up communal kitchens around the town of Villa El Salvador.
 
Her acts of selflessness ran afoul of the Shining Path, which, because it was attempting to turn Peru Communist, didn’t want the lower classes to be fed lest they lose their revolutionary ferment. In doing good for the people Shining Path was supposed to represent, Moyano was putting her life in danger.
 
Moyano believed in working within Peru’s existing political system, empowering people through democracy. “They have always said that the [communal] kitchens and the Vaso de Leche committees weaken the people and rob them of initiative,” Moyano writes in her autobiography. “We say that this isn’t so, because what we support is self-government. That is, we believe that people have to learn to govern themselves.”
 
A number of women’s rights advocates in Peru proceeded Moyano as victims of left-wing terrorism, and Moyano knew she was a target. Nevertheless, she persisted in her work, and her story is both tragic and uplifting.
 
Although it’s called The Autobiography of Maria Elena Moyano: The Life and Death of a Peruvian Activist, the book’s first 34 (out of 94) pages are devoted to a prologue written by the translator, Patricia S. Taylor Edmisten. The prologue is effective both as an introduction to Moyano’s story and as a concise history of Peruvian women. Indeed, it makes Moyano’s particular story all the more interesting.
 
Moyano’s words constitute the rest of the book, which Diana Milosavich Tupac, the editor, divides into two sections. In the first section, Milosavich gathers quotes from interviews Moyano did to present her thoughts on such topics as women’s rights and the Shining Path. The brief final section fits the conventional definition of autobiography, with Moyano telling her life’s story chronologically. “My name is María Elena Moyano Delgado” is the opening sentence, and the rest of her autobiography maintains this direct, simple style.
 
Some of the most interesting aspects of Moyano’s autobiography don’t involve her political life, but her personal relationships. When she became pregnant by her boyfriend, Gustavo Pineki, she didn’t want to pressure him to marry her. “Gustavo had his own economic problems,” she writes. “He was the oldest of seven orphaned brothers and sisters, and his father was in prison. He also had a pregnant sister . . . I would have been too much.”
 
It was Moyano’s mother who asked Gustavo to marry her daughter.
 
Moyano writes with admirable honesty about her relationship with Gustavo, which overall she characterizes as good. She does, however, find occasional fault with his machismo: “There were occasional fights because I wanted him to assume some of the household chores.”
 
Moyano concludes her autobiography with a poem summarizing her life. It was written in the same month in which she was assassinated, and includes this poignant, telling line: “I’ve already lived the most beautiful years of my life.”
 
Although a short book, The Autobiography of Maria Elena Moyano: The Life and Death of a Peruvian Activist is an excellent introduction to women’s struggles in Peru and stands as a testament to the courage of Moyano, who was only 33 years old when she died.
 
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Mark Brazaitis is the author of The River of Lost Voices: Stories from Guatemala (Iowa Short Fiction Award) , winner of the 1998 Iowa Short Fiction Award, and Steal My Heart, a novel. His stories, poems and essays have appeared in The Sun, Beloit Fiction Journal, Notre Dame Review, Atlanta Review, Shenandoah, and other literary journals. He is an assistant professor of English at West Virginia University.
 
http://www.peacecorpswriters.org/pages/2000/0011/011rvautomoy.html

THE ASSASSINATION OF MARIA ELENA MOYANO
Chronicle of a death foretold

Maria Elena Moyano was murdered by Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path).

She was 33 years old, mother of two boys aged 11 and 12, a beloved and supportive friend, a leader of the popular women's movement of Peru, and Deputy Mayor of the Municipality of Villa El Salvador (VES), one of the largest districts of Lima. She was first killed and then her body was blown up with dynamite. The repeated death threats against her were, on February 15, turned into a crime.
 


Maria Elena's commitment to women and people began with her first years in the youth movement. This was the begining of her political experience, at the very moment of the birth of VES . From that time on Maria Elena was a leader, firstly as an adolescent, secondly as a woman and finally as an important political activist in defense of democratic rights for women and the poor as a whole. In 1984, aged 24, she was elected President of Fepomuves (Federation of Popular Women of VES), one of the most active and effective women's organisations in the country, and probably in all of Latin America. Her political vision -seeking a democratic and pluralistic future-favoured links between Fepomuves and the various women's organisation operating in the neighbourhood. The organisation thus went beyond the original political basis of the federation, the Mothers' Clubs (Clubes de Madres).

Fepomuves currently represents around 10,000 women from VES. This is a coalition that carries out the most diverse activities: people's kitchens (comedores populares), health committees, groups related to the Glass of Milk programme (Programa del Vaso de Leche) income-generating projects, committees for basic education . In 1990 Maria Elena left the Fepomuves leadership, opening the way to the rise of the new generation of female leaders formed in recent years. Directly after this she was elected Deputy Mayor in the municipality of VES. This was at a particular political moment: the circumstances required the peoples's leaders to not only seriosly commit themselves to the grassroots organizations but to also take a principled stand on, and pronounce a clearcut condemnation of terrorist methods.

The political confrontation between Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) and the organisations of the people has a long and sinister history in Peru.

There has been a dramatic increase in the number of killings, in which miners' and peasants' leaders, leftwing political representatives, soldiers and policemen of high and low rank, company executives, students and women's leaders have lost their lives.

Sendero is particularly suspicious of women's organisations. Their deep roots amongst the people, their commitment to democratic values, their distance from and criticism of political violence, their capacity to create new forms of daily life (in order to counter the adverse economic conditions in the country) are diametrically opposed to Senderopolitical aims. Sendero strategy has consequently been a campaign of murder and terror, intended to isolate the leader from their base. It also relies on ignominious accusations of betrayal of the popular struggle. Sendero accuses women leaders of reformism, of collaboration with the government, of opportunism (since they are committed to survival and to the improvement of their lives, of those of their families and their communities).

Sendero does not accept the active role of women in the process of transforming the destiny of the country, it questions the efforts of women's organizations for better education for women and for their full acquisition of citizenship rights. It also accuses women leaders of imposing the use of contraceptive methods so as to diminish the number of children that women should produce for the so-called revolution.

A brief chronology of terror

In mid-1991 Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) began an open attack on the leadership of popular women in Lima. In September, Juana Lopez, coordinator of the Glass of Milk Programme in the Carmen de la Legua District of Lima, was murdered after she had denounced the presence and activity of Sendero in the neighbourhood. Beside her corpse was found a dead dog and a poster. Organizations took to the streets of Lima to denounce and repudiate the bloody methods of Sendero. Maria Elena was a speaker at the final gathering, strongly condemning the demented terrorist activities of Sendero as threatening the very existence of the country.

From then on Sendero extended the death threats to various other female leaders, among them Maria Elena and Emma Hilario -the latter being the President of the National Federation of People's Kitchens. In October Sendero attacked the Fepomuves food storage centres with bombs. In November, as threats against Maria Elena's life intensified, we managed to convince her to leave the country for several weeks. This was intended to provide her some relief from the daily tension she was being subjected to, and to permit us to establish minimal measures to protect her life. Maria Elena returned to Peru ten days later and told us that she would rather lose her life struggling against Sendero than die with feelings of anguish and impotence away from the country.

At six a.m. on December 19th, Sendero shot Emma Hilario with a shotgun in her own house. Miraculously she was not killed, but she was forced to leave the country as the only way of protecting her life.

After that the feminist movement, as well as the popular women's movement, concentrated their attention on the protection of Maria Elena.

We managed to obtain two Peruvian Police bodyguards for her. She did not sleep at home or even in the neighbourhood. She carried out her activities in the Municipal Council and the women's movement with considerable precautions. We had the illusion that these measures would protect her life. The death threats continued, however -as did the systematic condemnation by Maria Elena of Sendero's methods and actions. These direct and courageous denunciations inspired her nomination as "Personality of the Year" by the national press.

On February 15 Maria Elena was brutally murdered, the killing being witnessed by her children and people from VES. Sendero had decided on an "armed strike" in Lima for the previous day. Maria Elena had once again resisted the proposal, calling upon the people not to accept Sendero's orders. The previous night she had not slept at home. She returned to the neighbourhood during the day, however, to participate in fund-raising activities being organised by the comen's commitees. During the party, in one of the committee rooms, an armed Sendero group arrive and forced those present to leave the place. Maria Elena stayed alone and, as her children and the women watched, she was machine-gunned and her corpse blown up with dynamite -an act of extreme cruelty that clearly reflects the crazed and perverse inspiration of Sendero terrorists.

We strongly believe that Maria Elena's death has not been in vain. We believe Peru to be a viable country, a place for women and men -of all ages, races, classes and conditions- to live in. This is what Maria Elena lived for. Presently in Peru we, as women, have taken on a political role of more importance than ever before in the history of the country. We are leaders, citizens, women's rights activists, organisers and mobilisers of the grassroots efforts to survive, to overcome the crisis and to protect life and livelihoods -as well as the democratic spaces and values that have cost us so much effort to construct.

http://www.yachay.com.pe/especiales/moyano/INGLES.HTM

 
Maria Elena Moyano

On this day February 17 in 1600 - Philosopher and priest Giordano Bruno was burnt alive at Campo de'Fiori in Rome, convicted on a charge of heresy.

Giordano Bruno (1548-1660) was an Italian philosopher, priest, cosmologist and occulist. Bruno is known for his mnemonic system based upon organized knowledge and as an early proponent of the idea of an infinite and homogeneous universe. Burnt at the stake as a heretic by the Roman Inquisition, Bruno is seen by some as the first "martyr for science."


Giordano Bruno
 
The Early Years
 
Born in Nola (in Campania, then part of the Kingdom of Naples) in 1548, he was originally named Filippo Bruno. His father was Giovanni Bruno, a soldier. At the age of eleven he traveled to Naples to study the Trivium. At 15, Bruno entered the Dominican Order, taking the name of Giordano from Giordano Crispo, his metaphysics tutor. He continued his studies, completing his novitiate, and becoming an ordained priest in 1572.

He was interested in philosophy, and was an expert on the art of memory; he wrote books on mnemonic technique, which Frances Yates contends may have been disguised Hermetic tracts. The writings attributed to Hermes Trismegistus had played an important role in the Renaissance Neoplatonic revival. At that time they were thought to date uniformly to the earliest days of ancient Egypt and to encode a form of "pristine wisdom" ("prisca philosophia"). They are now believed to date mostly from about 300 A.D. and are associated with Neoplatonism.


Woodcut illustration of one of Giordano Bruno's mnemonic devices: in the spandrels are the four classical elements: earth, air fire, water

Born on this day February 17 in 1848 - Louisa Lawson, Australian suffragist and writer.

Louisa Lawson 1848-1920) was an Australian writer, publisher, suffragist and feminist.


Louisa Lawson

Louisa Lawson was born and grew up in Mudgee, New South Wales. Her family was poor and as the second of 12 children, she was forced to leave school at the age of thirteen. In 1866 Louisa married Niels Larsen (Peter Lawson); her husband was often absent leaving Louisa to raise four children on her own. In 1882 she took her children and moved to Sydney. She managed boarding houses and saved money that she used to buy a share in the radical pro-federation newspaper The Republican in 1887.

With her earnings and experience from working on The Republican she was able in May 1888, to edit and publish The Dawn.

The Dawn was Australia’s first journal produced solely by women; it was published monthly and distributed throughout Australia and overseas. The Dawn had a strong feminist perspective, and discussed issues such as the women's right to vote and assume public office, women's education, women's economic and legal rights, domestic violence, and temperance.

The Dawn was published monthly for seventeen years (1888 - 1905) and at its height employed 10 female staff. Her son Henry Lawson also wrote poems and stories for the paper. The Dawn press printed Henry's first book Short Stories in Prose and Verse in 1894.

In 1889 Louisa founded The Dawn Club, which became the hub of the suffrage movement in Sydney. In 1891 the New South Wales Women's Suffrage League formed to campaign for women's suffrage, she allowed the League to use the Dawn office to print pamphlets and literature free of charge. When it was finally achieved in 1902 with the passing of the New South Wales Womanhood Suffrage Bill, Louisa was introduced to the members of Parliament as 'The Mother of Suffrage in New South Wales'.

For the women at the time universal suffrage was not the key issue, Louisa did not criticise the government for failing to give Indigenous Australians the vote.

Louisa retired in 1905 but continued to write for Sydney magazines and published The Lonely Crossing and Other Poems, a collection of 52 poems. She died in 1920 in Gladesville mental hospital and was buried in a pauper's grave.

In 1975 Australia Post released a stamp in honour of Louisa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisa_Lawson

Louisa Lawson (1848 - 1920)

Feminist, Women's rights activist, Writer, Businesswoman and Suffragist

Born: 17 February 1848  Guntawang, Mudgee district, New South Wales, Australia.  
Died: 12 August 1920  Gladesville, New South Wales, Australia.

Louisa Lawson was an independent and resourceful woman who fought for women’s rights during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century in Australia. Married at eighteen years of age to Niels (Peter) Larsen, later Lawson, she produced five children, one of whom died in infancy. Another child, Henry became one of Australia’s most famous writers. On her move to Sydney from country New South Wales in 1883 she supported her family by doing washing, sewing and taking in boarders. In 1887 she bought the Republican and with her son Henry edited and wrote most of the newspaper’s copy. In 1888 she established the Dawn, a journal devoted to women’s concerns and continued publication until 1905. In May 1889 Louisa launched the campaign for female suffrage and announced the formation of the Dawn Club where women met to discuss ‘every question of life, work and reform’ and to gain experience in public speaking. Louisa Lawson could claim success when women in New South Wales gained the suffrage in 1902.
 


Career Highlights

Alternative Names:  Albury, Louisa (maiden name)

Louisa Lawson was the second of twelve children of Henry Albury and his wife Harriet, nee Winn. She attended Mudgee National School and was asked to work as a pupil teacher but her parents required her to remain at home to assist with the care of her younger brothers and sisters. After her marriage to Norwegian born Niels Hertzberg Larsen ( Peter), she had five children between 1867 and 1877. Left alone to rear her children when her husband was away working, she earned a living in a variety of ways, such as sewing, selling dairy produce and fattening cattle.

Her move to Sydney in 1883 signalled the end of her marriage and her launch into new ventures. She and her son Henry worked together on the Republican, which she bought in 1887. Through the pages of the Dawn she took up women’s causes in particular the fight for female suffrage in New South Wales. She encountered problems with the Typographical Union as she had employed female printers, but the union refused membership to females. It attempted to force her to dismiss her printers, which she refused to do.
 

Louisa May Lawson

She advocated the enfranchisement of women believing that they would change evil laws and protect women and their children. On the formation of the Womanhood Suffrage League of New South Wales in 1891, Louisa Lawson was elected to its Council. Its meetings were held at the Dawn office. She was also a member of the Women’s Progressive Association and campaigned for women to be appointed to public office.

Louisa Lawson died at the Hospital for the Insane, Gladesville, on 12 August 1920. 

- Sources used to compile this entry: Heather Radi, 'Lawson, Louisa (1848-1920)', in Bede Nairn and Geoffrey Serle (eds) Australian Dictionary of Biography, Melbourne University Press, Carlton, Vic., 1996, vol 10, pp.23-25; Brian Matthews, Louisa , McPhee Gribble, Melbourne, 1987.

http://www.womenaustralia.info/biogs/AWE1156b.htm

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Will it be believed, a hundred years hence, that such a state of things existed? 
 
- Louisa Lawson, The Dawn

The 1891 'Monster' Suffrage Petition



Will it be believed, a hundred years hence, that such a state of things existed?  Louisa Lawson, The Dawn

Women from the Victorian goldfields were not the first women in the world to get the vote. However, the women elsewhere were in touch with, and depended on support from, women from Victoria.

In 1891 Vida Goldstein and many other women went from door to door collecting signatures for a petition demanding that women have a right to vote on equal terms with men.

They collected 33,000 signatures from all over Victoria.

1891 Women’s Suffrage Petition

“To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Colony of Victoria, in Parliament assembled.

The Humble Petition of the undersigned Women of Victoria respectfully sheweth:

That you petitioners believe:

That Governent of the People by the People, and for the People, should mean all the People, and not one-half.

That Taxation and Representation should go together without regard to the sex of the taxed.

That all Adult Persons should have a voice in Making the Laws which they are required to obey.

That, in short, Women should Vote on Equal Terms with Men.

Your Petitioners, therefore, humbly pray your Honourable House to pass a Measure for conferring the Parliamentary Franchise upon Women, regarding this as a right which they most humbly desire.

And your Petitioners will ever Pray.

Vida Goldstein said that the few women who refused to sign the petition were, 'almost without exception, those whose interest ended at the garden gate'.


VIDA GOLDSTEIN

Women won the vote federally in 1902 with The Commonwealth Franchise Act but it wasn’t till 1908, with the passing of the Victorian Adult Suffrage Act that women could vote in State elections in Victoria.
 
In 1903 Vida Goldstein became the first woman in the British Empire to stand for parliamentary election when she contested the federal senate election.

This was the first federal election in which women were eligible to vote and become a candidate and Vida Goldstein received 50,000 votes in a state wide contest in which the highest vote was 110,000.
 
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~wmnstime
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~mothers/9%20Women%20Were%20Not%20Quiet.html

Stephen Kim Sou-hwan dies at 86; outspoken S. Korean cardinal
South Korea's first Roman Catholic cardinal, Stephen Kim Sou-hwan helped push authoritarian rulers toward democracy and shielded anti-government protesters.
By John  Glionna
The Los Angeles Times 
February 17, 2009
 
Reporting from Busan, South Korea -- Stephen Kim Sou-hwan, a philosophy student who became South Korea's first Roman Catholic cardinal and an outspoken critic of authoritarian rule, died Monday. He was 86.
 


Kim had been suffering from pneumonia for several months and was recently hospitalized, the Yonhap news service reported.
 
He died at a Seoul hospital, according a statement from the archdiocese of Seoul.

Known for his warm, wry smile, Kim was appointed cardinal in 1969 by Pope Paul VI and became an advocate for democracy in this East Asian nation that is home to 4.5 million Catholics.

A spokesman for South Korean President Lee Myung-bak called Lee's death a "national loss."

In 1987, while the nation was mired in anti-government protests, Kim allowed student activists to take refuge in Seoul's main cathedral.

His efforts helped launch South Korea, which had been ruled by strongmen for more than a generation, on the road to democracy.

Kim was born in the city of Daegu in 1922, one of eight children, and attended high school in Seoul. He studied philosophy at Sophia University in Tokyo in the early 1940s and at Catholic University of Korea from 1947 to 1951.

After serving briefly as a parish priest and as a secretary in the Archdiocese of Daegu, he traveled to Germany to study sociology.

At 46, he became the youngest member of the College of Cardinals.

Kim was an advocate of the poor and took an active part in social and democracy issues, opposing the violent suppression of labor unions.

He called for Japan to take greater responsibility for the damage it caused in its 35-year colonial rule over Korea, which ended in 1945.

During the 1987 demonstrations, as he gave refuge to student activists, he brazenly told the government: "If the police break into the cathedral, I will be in the very front. Behind me, there will be reverends and nuns.
 
After we are wrestled down, there will be students," according to his website.

Along with serving as archbishop of Seoul for three decades until 1998, Kim led the Diocese of Pyongyang in North Korea from 1975 until 1998, though he was never able to travel to the country, which remains at political odds with South Korea.
 
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Ju-min Park of The Times' Seoul bureau contributed to this report.
 
http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-stephen-kim17-2009feb17,0,4523209.story[

Korea's first cardinal, bold human rights' defender, dies at age 86
By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service
February 16, 2009

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Korea's first cardinal, an outspoken defender of human rights, died in Seoul, South Korea, Feb. 16 at the age of 86.

At the time of his death, Cardinal Stephen Kim Sou-hwan was the longest-serving cardinal in the Roman Catholic Church, having been named to the College of Cardinals nearly 40 years ago by Pope Paul VI.

In a telegram Feb. 16 offering his condolences to Cardinal Nicholas Cheong Jin-suk of Seoul, Pope Benedict XVI recalled "with gratitude Cardinal Kim's long years of devoted service to the Catholic community in Seoul and his many years of faithful assistance to the Holy Father as a member of the College of Cardinals."

Cardinal Kim's death leaves the College of Cardinals with 188 members, 115 of whom are under age 80 and therefore eligible to vote in a papal conclave.

Born in Daegu in May 1922, the late cardinal was ordained a priest in 1951. He carried out his pastoral ministry in Daegu during the Korean War before earning a degree in philosophy at the Catholic University of Jochi Daigaku in Tokyo, Japan.

Back in Korea, he ran the Catholic newspaper, the "Catholic Shilbo."

The Korean cardinal continued his studies in Munster, Germany, from 1956 to1965, specializing in social sciences. He was then named bishop of Masan, Korea, in 1966.

He was named archbishop of Seoul just two years later and served as head of the archdiocese for 30 years until his retirement in 1998.

Pope Paul VI made him Korea's first cardinal when he elevated the 46-year-old archbishop during a consistory in 1969.

As archbishop of Seoul, Cardinal Kim intensified "a spirit of conciliar renewal in the diocese and intensified evangelizing activities in which he invited the lay faithful to participate," said a biography released by the Vatican press office Feb. 16. The cardinal had called on the laity to evangelize North Koreans, whose communist government restricts their religious freedom.

The cardinal was also dedicated to interreligious dialogue and coordinating diverse charitable and social service activities, the Vatican biography said.

In 1999, Cardinal Kim said religious fundamentalism was rising in Asia and posed a real problem for the church. While the church should always have the right to proclaim that Christ is the way and the truth for all people, he had said things were not that simple on the ground.

He said for Catholics it was absolutely essential for church members to have a better appreciation for other religions and recognize that they contain "precious jewels" for Christians, as the Second Vatican Council taught.

His declarations and initiatives promoting and defending human rights were "quite courageous" given the "difficult internal political situation" at the time, the Vatican biography said.

From 1975 to 1998, the cardinal also served as apostolic administrator of the Pyongyang Diocese in North Korea.

One of the main focuses of the cardinal's work had been pressing for reconciliation between North and South Korea and for freedom of religion in the communist North.

He joined other South Korean religious leaders in urging North and South Korea to resolve heightened tensions through dialogue and cooperation.

Cardinal Kim and the local church came to be seen as defenders of human rights against dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s, reported the Asian church news agency UCA News.

Seoul's Myongdong Cathedral was seen as a prominent symbol of the people's aspirations for democratization and many local people have called the late cardinal the guardian of human rights and democracy, UCA News reported Feb. 16.

He often told people that his journey to the priesthood was not easy; he was forced to serve in the Japanese army during the World War II when he was a seminarian, according to the news agency.

Cardinal Kim was also instrumental in founding the Federation of Asian Bishops' Conferences and served as its president from 1973 to 1977. He also served as president of the Korean Catholic Bishops' Conference.

His contribution to the church in Asia was acknowledged when he was named one of the three president delegates of the special assembly of the Synod of Bishops for Asia held at the Vatican in 1998, UCA News said.

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0900731.htm

Two women wait for a for a memorial Mass to begin for South Korean Cardinal Stephen Kim Sou-hwan, retired archbishop of Seoul. Cardinal Kim, Korea's first cardinal, died February 16, 2009 at Kangnam St. Mary Hospital in Seoul at age 86. (CNS/Reuters)

Beloved 'Asian John XXIII' laid to rest in Korea
By Thomas C. Fox, NCR Staff
National Catholic Reporter
February 21, 2009
 
Remembrance

Despite chilly weather, some 10,000 Mass people attended the funeral mass at Myeongdong Cathedral Friday. Most had to gather outside the church where large screens showed the liturgy. All national TV stations telecast the one-and-a-half-hour service.

Since Cardinal Stephen Kim Sou-hwan died Feb. 16 at the age of 86 more than 400,000 people have come to pay their last respects.

Cardinal Kim, the John XXIII of Asia, had a forward-looking vision matched only by his humility and commitments to democracy, human rights and the poor. He was an advocate of the local church and will be remembered as the person who gave life and form to the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conference, which has been the mind and soul of Asian Catholicism for nearly four decades.

Pope Paul VI named Kim Seoul metropolitan in 1968. The following year the pope made him the first Korean cardinal as well as the youngest cardinal in the world at that time, at the age of 46.

Kim quickly became a defender of human rights as he protested the Korean military dictatorships of the 1970s and 1980s. At that time Seoul's downtown Cathedral became a haven for protesters fleeing military clubs and arrests.

In January 2001 I traveled with my wife to Seoul to meet Kim who had retired two years earlier as the leader of the South Korean church.

It was on a bitter cold morning that we sat down with him in his office on the campus of Seoul’s Catholic University. With winds rattling the windows and temperatures below zero, his office was chilly and he quickly offered us hot green tea.

The cardinal was characteristically cordial. He told me he was familiar with the National Catholic Reporter and asked us about our family. In Asia, family talk precedes business.Soon I asked the cardinal if he would share with me some of his most valued memories. He spoke first about standing up against the dictatorships.

“Those were tough years,” he said in English.

“And lonely years?” I asked.

“Yes, sometimes our bishops did not always agree on the statements we needed to make.”

There were divisions within the ranks of the Korean bishops at that time, he said. Not so much about the nature of the regimes, but as to how to respond to their widespread rights violations. Some bishops wanted to stay relatively quiet and work from the inside. Kim thought otherwise. He felt compelled to speak out, to be a voice for the people, he said. As archbishop of Seoul, he was at times in a lonely place as he stood – sometimes all alone - against the generals.

During that time he opened the Seoul cathedral, offering it as a place for political sanctuary. In the process he extended his Episcopal cloak of protection to tens of thousands of students, workers and political dissidents.

In 1975, in one memorable cathedral confrontation, police arrested opposition leader (and later Korean president and Nobel Peace Prize laureate), Kim Dae Jung, and two dozen other protesters as Kim led 2,000 supporters in a prayer service. A decade later, one of South Korea’s largest newspapers, Dong-a Ilbo, expressing gratitude for the nation, naming Kim “Man of the Year.” Said the paper: “His vision of democracy – his vision that people be respected, his going out to seek the marginalized and the oppressed, to be with them, to comfort and pray with them – is the reason we have chosen Kim Sou Hwan man of the year.”

Then the cardinal began to talk about the early days when Korean pride and belief in the needs and opportunities of local culture moved him to contemplate beginning an Asian bishops’ conference.

Looking back over the decades, he chuckles and says that it was nothing short of a miracle that the Asian bishops’ organization he dreamed up, one dedicated to enhancing local culture and working with the poor, ever got off the ground. Distrust in Rome almost did it in, he told me.

Kim spoke about an important gathering of the presidents of eleven Asian bishops’ conferences some four months after Pope Paul VI’s visit to Manila in 1970. The bishops were in Hong Kong to nourish the idea of forming an umbrella organization to unite all the bishops of Asia. Specifically they wanted to draw up statutes so they could present them in Rome.

However, once in Hong Kong, Cardinal Edward Cassidy, the Vatican diplomat of Taipei, Taiwan at the time, gave the Asian bishops some unexpected and shocking news.

He told them that key members of the Roman Curia were so opposed to the idea of the proposed organization they wanted all work on it to stop immediately.

“Cassidy told us that there was nothing that could be done. The only thing left (for us) to do was to go shopping -- or leave Hong Kong right away.” “We were shocked,” Kim continued, adding he was equally determined to stay the course. I asked Cassidy to imagine the reaction of the mass media when word got out that Rome had canceled the meeting of the Asian bishops, Kim said. “They knew we were in Hong Kong to discuss the organization,” he went on. “If we stopped it would be very negative. It would be very bad publicity for the Roman church.”

Cassidy listened and pondered Kim’s remarks - and eventually agreed with him. He had been won over and, in fact, went on to say he would personally take responsibility for the continuing of the bishops’ meeting, Kim told me.

With Cassidy’s new reassurance the bishops began their work. First they formed an organizational working committee that would draft statutes. The group named Kim committee president.

By the end of April 1971 the committee completed a first draft of the statutes. Later, after receiving feedback and suggestions from the Asian episcopal conferences, the group sketched out several revisions. By November 1971, it wrote a proposed constitution and again distributed papers to the various national conferences. The statutes, reflecting the wider Asian conferences’ sentiments, were well received. The only reservation at the time was that some bishops wanted assurances that membership in the new organization would be strictly voluntary.

By the end of August 1972, less than two years after Manila, the presidents of twelve bishops’ conferences had given their approval and it was decided that the four Asian cardinals – Valerian Gracias of Bombay, Thomas Cooray of Colombo, Darmojuwono and Kim – would go to Rome to present the approved constitution to Pope Paul.

“The pope was supportive,” Kim recalled. However, not everyone in the Vatican was so pleased. “By then CELAM (the Latin American Bishops' Conference) had been established (in 1955) and some in Rome did not accept it,” said Kim. “They did not want another CELAM. It was a matter of control. Rome didn’t want to lose control.”

There was another sticking point. The Vatican, Kim said, did not want the proposed bishops’ organization to have, in church parlance, “binding authority.” Rome did not want the bishops involved in strict moral or doctrinal matters. “We assured the pope,” Kim said. “What we envisioned was an organization that was pastoral in nature, an advisory body aimed at facilitating communication.” Kim also told the pope the new body would work for social justice and human development; that it would promote and defend the greater good of Asia. Implicit in Kim’s description to the pope was an idea close to the pontiff’s heart – an organization committed to practicing collegiality, putting the ideals of the council to work. The new group would help forge a Vatican II vision of church.

Ironically, the fact that the nascent organization did not, in the final analysis, end up with the official authority Rome had feared turned out to be a real plus. Some in Rome clearly feared a countervailing Asian authority, another power center. The truth is that the Asian bishops were not really seeking “power” as much as they were seeking better communication. They were looking down a pastoral path.

As it turned out, by not having “binding authority,” the Asian bishops, not burdened with the weight of such authority, were able to act much more freely - and agree more quickly - to the many statements they were to issue in the years that followed. For the Asian bishops the important issues, it turned out, would be pastoral in nature, not doctrinal. They would deal with mission, spirituality, dialogue with other religions, peace and justice issues. They would have to do with charting the direction of the church in Asia.

In the years that passed the Asian episcopal vision took form. Explained Kim: “Because there was no binding authority there was more freedom and more willingness to act in a cooperative spirit.” It was in this spirit of cooperation and freedom – beneath Vatican radar – that the Asian vision of church took hold.

In November 1972 Pope Paul gave his final approval to the proposed statues - for a two-year experimental period. At the end of two years, however, the question of whether to continue or not was moot. The conference had taken off.

The Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences, or FABC, as it began to be called, was now taking shape to include bishops’ conferences in South, Southeast and East Asia including the bishops of Bangladesh, Taiwan, India-Nepal, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Laos-Cambodia, Malaysia-Singapore-Brunei, Myanmar, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam.

With the Vatican approval in hand, the Asian bishops quickened their pace. On Feb. 13, 1973, presidents of 10 Asian bishops’ conferences met again in Hong Kong. This time they worked out FABC’s formal structures.

In one of the most formative statements ever written by the Asian bishops, they answered emphatically: We enhance life and build community – we become church - by entering into dialogue with local cultures, local religions and local peoples. Here are the words they used:
The leadership of the FABC would continue to uphold these goals, despite considerable challenges and opposition, for at least the next three decades. The vision statement that came out of Taiwan has set the direction for the FABC and through it, the local Asian churches, into the twenty-first century.

Tom Fox is NCR Editor and author of Pentecost in Asia, a book about the birth and growth of the FABC.
 
http://ncronline3.org/drupal/?q=node/3347

Korea’s 1st Cardinal Leaves Legacy of Compassion, Forgiveness and Love
By Cathy Rose A. Garcia
Staff Reporter
Korea Times
February 20, 2009
 
Koreans bid a final farewell to the much beloved spiritual leader Cardinal Stephen Kim Sou-hwan in a modest funeral ceremony at Myeongdong Cathedral, central Seoul, Friday morning.

Cardinal Kim, the country's first Roman Catholic cardinal, died Monday at the age of 86. Since his death, more than 400,000 people have paid their last respects to him at the cathedral.

The funeral ceremony was solemn and low-key, befitting Cardinal Kim, who was known as a humble man and champion of the poor and oppressed. Even his cedar coffin, which was placed at the center of the cathedral, was simply adorned with a cross, his motto and his name.
 
Cardinal Nicholas Cheong Jin-suk, who succeeded Kim as archbishop of Seoul, presided over the funeral Mass. ``Cardinal Kim was everyone's apostle of love and peace. Although he was suffering from the infirmities of old age, until his last breath, he did not lose his humanity or smile,'' Cheong said in his homily.


A hearse carrying Cardinal Stephen Kim Sou-hwan’s coffin leaves Myeongdong Cathedral Friday morning after his funeral Mass. President Lee Myung-bak hailed the cardinal as a true leader of all Koreans, especially the poor. / Korea Times Photo by Ryu Hyo-jin

Around 800 people, including Kim's family and close friends, Catholic clergymen, Prime Minister Han Seung-soo, Culture Minister Yu In-chon, and ambassadors from Britain, Spain, Germany and Australia, attended the nearly two-hour-long ceremony. Another estimated 10,000 people braved the cold weather to watch it on big screens outside the cathedral. Many were seen wiping away tears throughout the Mass.

Kim fought for democracy and human rights in the 1970s and 80s, speaking out against the authoritarian governments. ``As a huge supporter of the democratic movement in the '70s and '80s, the mental anguish he must have gone through both as a priest and as a human being is unimaginable. He developed lifelong insomnia during that time,'' Cheong said.

Cheong also read a message from Pope Benedict XVI: ``(Cardinal Kim) devoted himself to the Catholic diocese in Seoul. As a member of the College of Cardinals, he cooperated with loyalty to the pope. Cardinal Kim will be remembered with gratitude.''

There were five eulogies during the mass, including one by the Apostolic Nuncio, or the Vatican's representative to Korea, Archbishop Osvaldo Padilla, and one from President Lee Myung-bak read by Prime Minister Han.
President Lee hailed the cardinal as a true leader of all Koreans, especially the poor. ``In these days, where the mentality of 'you're either with us or not,' he taught us to respect others and to talk with open minds. Yet he never lost his principle… The message the cardinal left with us through his words and actions is to be grateful, to love and to share. Though the cardinal has left us, he will always remain with us in our hearts,'' Lee said.

After the mass, eight pallbearers, young priests from the Seoul Catholic Archdiocese, carried the cardinal's coffin outside the cathedral. People bowed their heads, while some wept openly, as the cardinal's coffin passed by.
 


The coffin was placed inside a black funeral hearse and taken to the Catholic Priests' Cemetery in Yongin, Gyeonggi Province, south of Seoul.

Skies were overcast as 2,000 attended the burial rites held at the cemetery. Cardinal Cheong prayed: ``Let (Cardinal Kim) be elevated to the rank of saint by the Lord's mercy and may he rest in peace,'' before the coffin was lowered into the grave.

As remaining family members wept, a red banner inscribed with the late Cardinal's name and titles was placed over the coffin. Incense was burnt and holy water sprinkled over it. Then shovels of dirt were heaped on by remaining family members and bishops. Sounds of prayer grew louder as dirt covered the coffin, and hymns were mixed with them to bid a final farewell to a beloved man.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who was holding a press conference with Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan at the same time as the funeral, also paid tribute to Kim.

``I want to take a moment to pay tribute to the late Cardinal Kim. He was a great spiritual leader not only for Korea and the people of Korea but for the world. I know that he will be remembered by Koreans and all who cared about democracy, human rights and human dignity,'' Clinton said.

Cardinal Kim was born in 1922 in Daegu, the youngest of eight siblings in a poor but devoutly Catholic family. His grandfather was persecuted for being a Roman Catholic and died in prison.

Kim studied philosophy at Sophia University in Tokyo from 1941 to 1944 and the Catholic University of Korea from 1947 to 1951. He was named Bishop of Masan in 1966, Archbishop of Seoul in 1968 and raised to the rank of Cardinal-Priest by Pope Paul VI in 1969. He retired in 1998.

― Korea Times Intern Hwang Sung-hee contributed to this article.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/02/113_39954.html

On February 19 in 2004 - Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal is awarded an honourary knighthood in recognition of a "lifetime of service to humanity".
 
Simon Wiesenthal (1908-2005) KBE was an Austrian-Jewish architectural engineer and Holocaust survivor who became famous after World War II for his work as a Nazi hunter who pursued Nazi war criminals in an effort to bring them to justice.
 

Simon Wiesenthal, 1999

Born February 19 in 1473 - Nicolaus Copernicus, Polish mathematician and astronomer

Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) was the first astronomer to formulate a scientifically based heliocentric cosmology that displaced the Earth from the center of the universe. His epochal book, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), is often regarded as the starting point of modern astronomy and the defining epiphany that began the Scientific Revolution.

Although Greek, Indian, and Muslim savants had published heliocentric hypotheses centuries before Copernicus, his publication of a scientific theory of heliocentrism, demonstrating that the motions of celestial objects can be explained without putting the Earth at rest in the center of the universe, stimulated further scientific investigations, and became a landmark in the history of modern science that is known as the Copernican Revolution.

Among the great polymaths of the Renaissance, Copernicus was a mathematician, astronomer, physician, classical scholar, translator, Catholic cleric, jurist, governor, military leader, diplomat, and economist.  Among his extensive responsibilities, astronomy figured as little more than an avocation — yet it was in that field that he made his mark upon the world.
 

Nicolas Copernicus
 
Life

Family  


Copernicus House,
his birthplace in Torun

Nicolaus Copernicus was born in a house on St. Anne's Street (now Copernicus Street) in the city of Torun (Thorn). Toruń was situated on the Vistula River in the Royal Prussia region of the Kingdom of Poland. Nicolaus was named after his father, who moved from Krakow to Toruń around 1458. His father was a wealthy copper trader and became a respected citizen of Toruń. Nicolaus's mother, Barbara Watzenrode (died after 1495), was born into a wealthy merchant family that was part of the patrician class in Toruń.

Nicolaus's father died between 1483 and 1485. After that, his maternal uncle, Lucas Watzenrode the Younger (1447–1512), a church canon who later to became Prince-Bishop governor of the Archbishopric of Warmia, took young Nicolaus under his protection and saw to his education and future career.

Nicolaus was the youngest of four children. His brother Andreas (Andrzej) became an Augustinian canon at Frombork. His sister Barbara (named after her mother) became a Benedictine nun. His sister Katharina (Katarzyna) married Barthel Gertner, a businessman and city councilor.

 
Monument in Toruń
 

 








On  February 22 in 1943 - World War II: Members of White Rose are executed in Nazi Germany.

The White Rose was a non-violent resistance group in Nazi Germany consisting of a number of students from the University of Munich and their philosophy professor. The group became known for an anonymous leaflet campaign, lasting from June 1942 until February 1943, that called for active opposition to German dictator Adolf Hitler's regime.

The six core members of the group were arrested by the Gestapo and executed by beheading in 1943. The text of their sixth leaflet was smuggled out of Germany through Scandinavia to the UK, and in July 1943 copies of it were dropped over Germany by Allied planes, retitled "The Manifesto of the Students of Munich."


Monument to the "Weiße Rose" in front of the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
 
Today, the members of the White Rose are honoured in Germany as amongst its greatest heroes, since they opposed the Third Reich in the face of almost certain death.

Members
 
The core of the White Rose comprised students from the university in Munich—Sophie Scholl, her brother Hans Scholl, Alex Schmorell, Willi Graf, Christoph Probst, Traute Lafrenz, Katharina Schueddekopf, Lieselotte (Lilo) Berndl, and Falk Harnack. Most were in their early twenties. A professor of philosophy and musicology, Kurt Huber, also associated with their cause. Additionally, Wilhelm Geyer, Manfred Eickemeyer, Josef Soehngen, and Harald Dohrn participated in their debates. Geyer taught Alexander Schmorell how to make the tin templates used in the graffiti campaign. Eugen Grimminger of Stuttgart funded their operations. Grimminger's secretary Tilly Hahn contributed her own funds to the cause, and acted as go-between between Grimminger and the group in Munich. She frequently carried supplies such as envelopes, paper, and an additional duplicating machine from Stuttgart to Munich.

Between June 1942 and February 1943, they prepared and distributed six leaflets, in which they called for the active opposition of the German people to Nazi oppression and tyranny. Huber wrote the final leaflet. A draft of a seventh leaflet, written by Christoph Probst, was found in the possession of Hans Scholl at the time of his arrest by the Gestapo. While Sophie Scholl hid incriminating evidence on her person before being taken into custody, Hans did not do the same with Probst's leaflet draft or cigarette coupons given him by Geyer, an irresponsible act that cost Christoph his life and nearly undid Geyer.


Members of the White Rose, Munich 1942. From left: Hans Scholl, his sister Sophie Scholl, and Christoph Probst. Courtesy of United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

The White Rose was influenced by the German Youth Movement, of which Christoph Probst was a member. Hans Scholl was a member of the Hitler Youth until 1937, and Sophie was a member of the Bund Deutscher Mädel. Membership of both groups was compulsory for young Germans, although many such as Willi Graf, Otl Aicher, and Heinz Brenner never joined. The ideas of Deutsche Jungenschaft vom 1.11.1929 (dj 1.11.) had strong influence on Hans Scholl and his colleagues. d.j.1.11 was a youth group of the German Youth Movement, founded by Eberhard Koebel in 1929. Willi Graf was a member of Neudeutschland, a Catholic youth association, and the Grauer Orden.

The group was motivated by ethical and moral considerations. They came from various religious backgrounds. Willi and Katharina were devout Catholics. The Scholls, Lilo, and Falk were just as devoutly Lutheran. Traute adhered to the concepts of anthroposophy, while Eugen Grimminger considered himself Buddhist. Christoph Probst was baptized Catholic shortly before his execution, but he followed his father's theistic beliefs.

Some had witnessed atrocities of the war on the battlefield and against the civilian population in the East. Willi Graf saw the Warsaw and Lodz Ghettos, and could not get the images of brutality out of his mind. By February 1943, the young friends sensed the reversal of fortune that the Wehrmacht suffered at Stalingrad would eventually lead to Germany's defeat. They rejected fascism and militarism and believed in a federated Europe that adhered to principles of tolerance and justice.

Origin
 
In 1941 Hans Scholl read a copy of a sermon by an outspoken critic of the Nazi regime, Bishop August von Galen, decrying the euthanasia policies (extended that same year to the concentration camps) which the Nazis maintained would protect the European gene pool. Horrified by the Nazi policies, Sophie obtained permission to reprint the sermon and distribute at the University of Munich as the group's first pamphlet prior to their formal organization.
 
Under Gestapo interrogation, Hans Scholl said that the name the White Rose had been taken from a Spanish novel he had read. Annette Dumbach and Jud Newborn speculate that this may have been The White Rose, a novel about peasant exploitation in Mexico published in Berlin in 1931, written by B. Traven, the German author of The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Dumbach and Newborn say there is a chance that Hans Scholl and Alex Schmorell had read this. They write that the symbol of the white rose was intended to represent purity and innocence in the face of evil.
 
Leaflets
 
Quoting extensively from the Bible, Aristotle, and Novalis, as well as Goethe and Schiller, they appealed to what they considered the German intelligentsia, believing that they would be intrinsically opposed to Nazism. At first, the leaflets were sent out in mailings from cities in Bavaria and Austria, since the members believed that southern Germany would be more receptive to their anti-militarist message.

Alexander Schmorell penned the words the White Rose has become most famous for having spoken. Most of the more practical material —calls to arms and statistics of murder— came from Alex's pen. Hans Scholl wrote in a characteristically high style, exhorting the German people to action on the grounds of philosophy and reason.

At the end of July 1942, some of the male students in the group were deployed to the Eastern Front for military service (acting as medics) during the academic break. In late autumn, the men returned, and the White Rose resumed its resistance activities. In January 1943, using a hand-operated duplicating machine, the group is thought to have produced between 6,000 and 9,000 copies of their fifth leaflet, "Appeal to all Germans!", which was distributed via courier runs to many cities (where they were mailed). Copies appeared in Stuttgart, Cologne, Freiburg, Chemnitz, Hamburg, Innsbruck, and Berlin. The fifth leaflet was composed by Hans Scholl with improvements by Huber. These leaflets warned that Hitler was leading Germany into the abyss; with the gathering might of the Allies, defeat was now certain. The reader was urged to "Support the resistance movement!" in the struggle for "Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and protection of the individual citizen from the arbitrary action of criminal dictator-states". These were the principles that would form "the foundations of the new Europe".

The leaflets caused a sensation, and the Gestapo began an intensive search for the publishers.

On the nights of the 3rd, 8th, and 15th of February 1943, the slogans "Freedom" and "Down with Hitler" appeared on the walls of the University and other buildings in Munich. Alexander Schmorell, Hans Scholl and Willi Graf had painted them with tar-based paint (similar graffiti that appeared in the surrounding area at this time was painted by imitators).

The shattering German defeat at Stalingrad at the beginning of February provided the occasion for the group's sixth leaflet, written by Huber. Headed "Fellow students!", it announced that the "day of reckoning" had come for "the most contemptible tyrant our people has ever endured". As the German people had looked to university students to help break Napoleon in 1813, it now looked to them to break the Nazi terror. "The dead of Stalingrad adjure us!"

Capture and Trial

On 18 February 1943, coincidentally the same day that Nazi propaganda minister Josef Goebbels called on the German people to embrace total war in his Sportpalast speech, the Scholls brought a suitcase full of leaflets to the university. They hurriedly dropped stacks of copies in the empty corridors for students to find when they flooded out of lecture rooms. Leaving before the class break, the Scholls noticed that some copies remained in the suitcase and decided it would be a pity not to distribute them. They returned to the atrium and climbed the staircase to the top floor, and Sophie flung the last remaining leaflets into the air. This spontaneous action was observed by the custodian Jakob Schmid. The police were called and Hans and Sophie Scholl were taken into Gestapo custody. The other active members were soon arrested, and the group and everyone associated with them were brought in for interrogation.


Atrium of the University

The Scholls and Probst were the first to stand trial before the Volksgerichtshof—the People's Court that tried political offenses against the Nazi German state—on 22 February 1943. They were found guilty of treason and Roland Freisler, head judge of the court, sentenced them to death. The three were executed by guillotine. All three were noted for the courage they faced death with, particularly Sophie, who remained firm despite intense interrogation (however, reports that she arrived at the trial with a broken leg from torture are false). She said to Freisler during the trial, "You know as well as we do that the war is lost. Why are you so cowardly that you won't admit it?"
 
The second White Rose trial took place on April 19, 1943. Only eleven had been indicted before this trial. At the last minute, the prosecutor added Traute Lafrenz (who was considered so dangerous she was to have had a trial all to herself), Gisela Schertling, and Katharina Schueddekopf. None had an attorney. One was assigned after the women appeared in court with their friends.

Professor Huber had counted on the good services of his friend, Justizrat Roder, a high-ranking Nazi. Roder had not bothered to visit Huber before the trial and had not read Huber's leaflet. Another attorney had carried out all the pre-trial paperwork. When Roder realized how damning the evidence was against Huber, he resigned. The junior attorney took over.

Grimminger initially was to receive the death sentence for funding their operations. His attorney successfully used the female wiles of Tilly Hahn to convince Freisler that Grimminger had not known what the money was really being used for. Grimminger therefore escaped with a sentence of ten years in a penitentiary.

The third White Rose trial was to have taken place on April 20, 1943 (Hitler's birthday), because Freisler anticipated death sentences for Wilhelm Geyer, Harald Dohrn, Josef Soehngen, and Manfred Eickemeyer. He did not want too many death sentences at a single trial, and had scheduled those four for the next day. However, the evidence against them was lost, and the trial was postponed until July 13, 1943.

At that trial, Gisela Schertling —who had betrayed most of the friends, even fringe members like Gerhard Feuerle— redeemed herself by recanting her testimony against all of them. Since Freisler did not preside over the third trial, the judge acquitted all but Soehngen (who got only six months in prison) for lack of evidence.

Alexander Schmorell and Kurt Huber were beheaded on July 13, 1943, and Willi Graf on October 12, 1943. Friends and colleagues of the White Rose, who had helped in the preparation and distribution of leaflets and in collecting money for the widow and young children of Probst, were sentenced to prison terms ranging from six months to ten years.

Prior to their deaths, several members of the White Rose believed that their execution would stir university students and other anti-war citizens into activism against Hitler and the war. Accounts suggest, however, that university students continued their studies as usual and citizens said nothing, many regarding the movement as anti-national. In fact, after the Scholl/Probst executions, some students celebrated their deaths.

After her release for the sentence handed down on April 19, Traute Lafrenz was rearrested. She spent the last year of the war in prison. Trials kept being postponed and moved to different locations because of Allied air raids. Her trial was finally set for April 1945, after which she surely would have been executed. Three days before trial, however, the Allies liberated the town where she was held prisoner, thereby saving her life.

The White Rose had the last word. Their last leaflet was smuggled to The Allies, who edited it, and air-dropped millions of copies over Germany. The members of the White Rose, especially Sophie, became icons of the new post-war Germany.

Commemoration
 
The square where the central hall of Munich University is located has been named "Geschwister-Scholl-Platz" after Hans and Sophie Scholl; the square opposite to it is "Professor-Huber-Platz". Two large fountains are in front of the university, one on either side of Ludwigstraße. The fountain in front of the university is dedicated to Hans and Sophie Scholl. The other, across the street, is dedicated to Professor Huber. Many schools, streets, and other places across Germany are named in memory of the members of the White Rose. The White Rose has also received artistic treatments, including the acclaimed opera Weiße Rose by composer Udo Zimmermann.

With the fall of Nazi Germany, the White Rose came to represent opposition to tyranny in the German psyche and was lauded for acting without interest in personal power or self-aggrandizement. Their story became so well-known that the composer Carl Orff claimed (though by some accounts, falsely) to his Allied interrogators that he was a founding member of the White Rose and was released. In fact, he was personally acquainted with Huber, but there is a lack of any evidence that Orff was involved in the movement.


A black granite memorial to the White Rose Movement in the Hofgarten in Munich with the dome of the Bavarian State Chancellery in the background

In an extended German national TV competition held in the autumn of 2003 to choose "the ten greatest Germans of all time" (ZDF TV), Germans under the age of 40 placed Hans and Sophie Scholl in fourth place, selecting them over Bach, Goethe, Gutenburg, Willy Brandt, Bismarck, and Albert Einstein. Not long before, women readers of the mass-circulation magazine "Brigitte" had voted Sophie Scholl as "the greatest woman of the twentieth century".

In February 2005, a movie about Sophie Scholl's last days, Sophie Scholl – Die letzten Tage (Sophie Scholl: The Final Days), featuring actress Julia Jentsch as Sophie, was released. Drawing on interviews with survivors and transcripts that had remained hidden in East German archives until 1990, it was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film in January 2006. An English language film, The White Rose (film), was in development for a time in 2005/06, to be directed by Anjelica Huston and starring Christina Ricci as Sophie Scholl.

Prior to the Oscar-nominated film, there had been three earlier film accounts of the White Rose resistance. The first is a film financed by the Bavarian state government entitled Das Verspechen (The Promise) and released in the 1970s. The film is not well known outside Germany, and to some extent even within the country. It was particularly notable in that unlike most films, it showed the White Rose from its inception and how it progressed.

In 1982, Percy Adlon's Fünf letzte Tage (The Last Five Days) presented Lena Stolze as Sophie in her last days from the point of view of her cellmate Else Gebel. In the same year, Stolze repeated the role in Michael Verhoeven's Die Weiße Rose (The White Rose).

A book, Sophie Scholl and the White Rose, was published in English in February 2006. An account by Annette Dumbach and Dr. Jud Newborn tells the story behind the film Sophie Scholl: The Final Days, focusing on the White Rose movement while setting the group's resistance in the broader context of German culture and politics and other forms of resistance during the Nazi era.

Lillian Garrett-Groag's play, The White Rose, premiered at the Old Globe Theatre in 1991.

In Fatherland, an alternate history novel by Robert Harris, there is passing reference to the White Rose's still remaining active in supposedly Nazi-ruled Germany in 1964.

In 2003, a group of students at the University of Texas in Austin, Texas established The White Rose Society dedicated to Holocaust remembrance and genocide awareness. Every April, the White Rose Society hands out 10,000 white roses on campus, representing the approximate number of people killed in a single day at Auschwitz. The date corresponds with Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Memorial Day. The group organizes performances of The Rose of Treason, a play about the White Rose, and has rights to show the movie Sophie Scholl – Die letzten Tage (Sophie Scholl: The Final Days). The White Rose Society is affiliated with Hillel and the Anti-Defamation League.

Quotes

• Last words of Sophie Scholl: "…your heads will fall as well". There is, however, some dispute over whether Sophie or Hans actually said this; other sources claim that Sophie's final words were "God, you are my refuge into eternity." The film "Sophie Scholl, The Last Days" shows her last words as being "The sun still shines" (however these are probably fictitious).

• Last words of Hans Scholl: "Es lebe die Freiheit!" (Long live freedom!).

• "We will not be silent. We are your bad conscience. The White Rose will not leave you in peace!" (Leaflet 4's concluding phrase, which became the motto of the White Rose resistance).

• "Now my death will be easy and joyful." These were the words of Christoph Probst after a Catholic priest conditionally baptized him and had heard his first Confession.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rose

The White Rose

The White Rose is a shining example of resistance to Hitler, but also of the ruthlessness which the Nazis authorities showed when faced with any opposition. In early 1943, the fortunes of war were clearly turning against the Germans. The battle of Stalingrad had been a complete disaster, resulting in the surrender of the Sixth Army on January 31, 1943. Around this time, a small group of students, mostly centered in the University of Munich, began openly to agitate against the Nazi regime. They saw the war as lost, the good things they had thought would result from the Nazis in the 1930s as having been thrown away, and were horrified at the mistreatment of the Jews. The leaders of the student revolt were Hans Scholl (25), a medical student and his sister Sophie (21), a biology student. Hans Scholl had been an enthusiastic member of the Hitler Youth in 1933, but he quickly became disillusioned with Nazism as its inhumanity and barbarism became more and more clear with the passage of time.

People who have never lived under a totalitarian government have difficulty understanding how difficult it was - and how dangerous - to organize opposition to the government. The Nazis in particular were organized right down to the street level and people were encouraged to inform on their parents, relatives, and friends to the Gestapo; in short, anyone who manifested disagreement with the Nazis could be in serious trouble. Under the law of the Third Reich, over 5,000 people were executed for such trivial offenses as making jokes about Hitler or listening to radio broadcasts from Britain.

Most of the White Rose members were medical students, except for Sophie Scholl, who majored in biology and philosophy, and many had Jewish friends or classmates, who had been persecuted under the Nazis, Their disillusionment became most pronounced as the brutality of the regime became more apparent and especially when the mass deportations of the Jews began.

The White Rose began distributing anti-government leaflets in mid 1942. 


Sophie Scholl

The main authors were Hans Scholl, Alex Schmorell, and George Wittenstein (see below) who wrote four leaflets and distributed about 100 copies of them. Of the 100, 35 fell into the hands of the Gestapo. At about this time, Sophie Scholl joined the group. It is known that Hans Scholl coined the expression "leaflets of the White Rose", but the origin of the expression is unclear. The leaflets protested against the brutality and evil of the government, and against the extermination of the Jews, which was beginning to become known to more and more people at this time.

In summer 1942, many of the male medical students at the University of Munich were obliged to serve a three-month stint on the Russian front. Several of the White Rose members were among them. There they saw with their own eyes the horrors of war, and there they also saw the unbelievable cruelty the Germans displayed to the Jews. They personally witnessed beatings and other mistreatment and heard reliable stories of the persecution of the Jews then in full swing. They returned in November 1942.

In February 1943, the Gauleiter (District Leader) of Bavaria, Paul Giesler, addressed the students at the University of Munich. By then, he was already aware of some of the White Rose activities. He sneeringly said that the female students should be producing children for the Reich rather than wasting time studying and added: "If some of the girls lack sufficient charm to find a mate, I will assign each of them one of my adjutants."

Female students who attempted to leave the session were arrested by the Gestapo, which led to a general riot and the eventual freedom of the women.

Several more activist leaflets soon followed, more and more revolutionary in nature, with the last ones calling openly for the overthrow of the government. By a stroke of bad luck, Sophie and Hans Scholl were observed dumping some of these leaflets out of a window at the university, were betrayed to the Gestapo and arrested. More than 80 arrests throughout Germany soon followed.

The Scholls and another collaborator were almost immediately (February 22, 1943) brought before the People's Court (Volksgerichtshof), a creation of the Nazi Party and feared for its denial of justice and cruelty. They were convicted of treason in a trial lasting only about 4 hours and sentenced to death by guillotine. Sophie Scholl had been mistreated so much in her "questioning" by the Gestapo that she arrived in court with a broken leg. But in a display of great courage, she stood up to the President of the Court, Roland Freisler (known for his perversion of justice), saying: "You know as well as we do that the war is lost. Why are you so cowardly that you won't admit it?"

The Scholls were executed the same day. A few days later, several of their colleagues were executed. The White Rose was finished.

Although they actually accomplished little (obviously they had no realistic chance of accomplishing very much from the outset), the White Rose students serve as an example that not all Germans blindly went along with Hitler. Their activities are important to include in any assessment of the reaction of Germans to Hitler, and what is striking is that the persecution of the Jews played a major role in galvanizing them into more open and radical opposition to the Hitler government. In spite of the difficulties they faced, they were imbued with a willingness to risk it all for their country and for the victims of its terrible practices. That they failed was perhaps preordained; that they dared to try is a testament to their humanity.

Where to start your research

• George Wittenstein, a White Rose collaborator who escaped by a stroke of luck, has written a brilliant and poignant four-part essay on the White Rose that can be found starting at: http://www.historyplace.com/pointsofview/white-rose1.htm. His essay was the inspiration for this one.
  
• Inge Scholl, The White Rose (1970)
  
• Richard Hanser, A Noble Treason (1979)
  
• Anton Gill, An Honourable Defeat (1994)

http://www.holocaust-history.org/short-essays/white-rose.shtml

Died on February 22, 1943: Sophia Magdalena Scholl

Sophia Magdalena Scholl (May 9, 1921 - February 22, 1943) was a prominent member of the White Rose non-violent resistance movement in Nazi Germany. She was convicted of treason after having been found distributing anti-war leaflets at the University of Munich with her brother Hans. As a result, they were both executed by guillotine.

Since the 1970s, Scholl has been celebrated as one of the great German  heroes who actively opposed the Third Reich during the Second World War.


Hans Scholl, Sophie Scholl, and Christoph Probst, who were executed for participating in the White Rose resistance movement against the Nazi regime in Germany.
 
Early life 

Sophie's father was the mayor of Forchtenberg am Kocher when she was born; she was the fourth of five children:

1. Inge Aicher-Scholl (1917-1998)
   
2. Hans Scholl (1918-1943)
   
3. Elisabeth Hartnagel (* 1920) (TV clips), married Sophie's long-term boyfriend, Fritz Hartnagel.
   
4. Sophie (1921-1943)
   
5. Werner Scholl (1922, missing in action since June 1944)

Sophie was raised a Lutheran. She entered grade school at the age of seven, learned easily and had a carefree childhood. In 1930, the family moved to Ludwigsburg and then two years later to Ulm where her father had a business consulting office.


The Town Hall in Forchtenberg, birthplace of Sophie Scholl

In 1932, Scholl started attending a secondary school for girls. At the age of twelve, she was required to join the Bund Deutscher Mädel (League of German Girls), like most of her classmates, but her initial enthusiasm gradually gave way to criticism. She was aware of the dissenting political views of her father, of friends, and also of some teachers. Political attitude had become an essential criterion in her choice of friends. The arrest of her brothers and friends in 1937 for participating in the German Youth Movement left a strong impression on her.

She had a talent for drawing and painting and for the first time came into contact with a few so-called 'degenerate' artists. An avid reader, she developed a growing interest in philosophy and theology. This was her alternative world to fascist National Socialism.

In the spring of 1940, she graduated from secondary school. The subject of her essay was 'The Hand that Moved the Cradle, Moved the World.' Being fond of children, she became a kindergarten teacher at the Fröbel Institute in Ulm-Söflingen. She had also chosen this kindergarten job hoping that it would be recognized as an alternate service to Reichsarbeitsdienst (National Labor Service), a prerequisite to be admitted to the University. This was not the case though and in the spring of 1941, she began a six month stint in the auxiliary war service as a nursery teacher in Blumberg. The military-like regimen of the Labor Service caused her to think very hard about the political situation as well as begin to practice passive resistance.


German stamp issued in 1991 in the Women in German history series

After her six months in the National Labor Service, in May 1942, she enrolled at the University of Munich as a student of biology and philosophy. Her brother Hans, who was studying medicine there, introduced her to his friends. Although this group of friends was eventually known for their political views, they were initially drawn together by a shared love of art, music, literature, philosophy and theology. Hiking in the mountains, skiing and swimming were also of importance. They often attended concerts, plays and lectures together.

In Munich, Scholl met a number of artists, writers and philosophers, particularly Carl Muth and Theodor Haecker, who were important contacts for her. The question that they pondered the most was how the individual must act under a dictatorship. During the summer vacation in 1942, Scholl had to do war service in a metallurgical plant in Ulm. At the same time, her father was serving time in prison for a critical remark about Hitler to an employee.

The White Rose
 
In the early summer of 1942, a group of young men — including Willi Graf, Christoph Probst and Hans Scholl — co-authored six anti-Nazi Third Reich political resistance leaflets. Calling themselves the White Rose, they instructed Germans to passively resist the Nazis. They had been horrified by the behaviour of the Germans on the Eastern Front where they had witnessed a group of naked Jews being shot in a pit.

Contrary to popular belief, Sophie Scholl was not a co-author of the articles. Her brother had been initially keen to keep her ignorant of their activities, but once she discovered his activities, she joined him and proved invaluable to the group: as a female, her chances of being randomly stopped by the SS were much smaller. She and rest of the White Rose were arrested for distributing the sixth leaflet at the University of Munich on February 18, 1943. 


Grave of  Hans Scholl, Sophie Scholl, and Christoph Probst, in the Perlacher Friedhof, next to the Stadelheim prison in Munich.

In the People's Court before the notorious Judge Roland Freisler on February 21, 1943, Scholl was recorded as saying "Somebody, after all, had to make a start. What we wrote and said is also believed by many others. They just do not dare express themselves as we did." Scholl and her brother's defiance, in the face of terrifying consequences, gained them enormous admiration.

On February 22, 1943, Sophie Scholl, her brother Hans and their friend Christopher Probst were found guilty of treason and condemned to death. They were all beheaded by executioner Johann Reichhart in Munich's Stadelheim Prison only a few hours later at 17:00. The execution was supervised by Dr. Walter Roemer who was the enforcement chief of the Munich district court. Prison officials emphasized the courage with which she walked to her execution. Her last words were partially: "Die Sonne scheint noch"—"The sun still shines." while her full comments were: "How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause. Such a fine, sunny day, and I have to go. But what does my death matter, if through us thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?

Legacy
 
Following her death, a copy of the sixth leaflet was smuggled out of Germany through Scandinavia to England by German jurist Helmuth von Moltke, where it was exploited by the Allied Forces. In mid-1943, they dropped millions of propoganda copies over Germany of the tract, now retitled The Manifesto of the Students of Munich.
 
The White Rose's legacy has, for many commentators, an intangible quality. Playwright Lillian Garrett-Groag stated in Newsday on February 22nd, 1993 that "It is possibly the most spectacular moment of resistance that I can think of in the 20th century... The fact that five little kids, in the mouth of the wolf, where it really counted, had the tremendous courage to do what they did, is spectacular to me. I know that the world is better for them having been there, but I do not know why."

In the same issue of Newsday, Holocaust historian Jud Newborn noted that "You cannot really measure the effect of this kind of resistance in whether or not X number of bridges were blown up or a regime fell... The White Rose really has a more symbolic value, but that's a very important value."

Honours 

 
Bust, sculpted by Nicolai Tregor

On February 22, 2003, a bust of Scholl was placed by the government of Bavaria in the Walhalla temple in her honour.

The Geschwister-Scholl-Institut for Political Science at the Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich is named in honour of Sophie and her brother Hans. The institute is home to the university's political science and communication departments, and is housed in the former Radio Free Europe building close to the city's Englischer Garten. There is also an ongoing effort to rename the Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich into "Geschwister Scholl University of Munich" by the LMU Students' Committee (AStA).

Over the last four decades many local schools as well as countless streets and squares in Germany have been named after Sophie Scholl and her brother.

 
Sophie Scholl and the White Rose, the definitive Account of the White Rose by Jud Newborn and Annette Dumbach, published in 2006, telling the full story behind the film, Sophie Scholl: The Final Days

As described in the preface and introductory material to Jud Newborn and Annette Dumbach's definitive book, Sophie Scholl and the White Rose (Oneworld, Oxford, 2006), in 2003, Germans were invited by ZDF Television to participate in a nation-wide competition to choose the top ten most important Germans of all time. Voters under the age of 40 helped catapult Sophie and her brother Hans Scholl into fourth place, winning over Bach, Goethe, Gutenberg, Bismarck, Willy Brandt and Albert Einstein. If the votes of young viewers alone had been counted, Sophie and Hans Scholl would have be ranked first. Several years earlier, readers of Brigitte Magazine, one of Germany's leading magazines for young women, voted Sophie Scholl "the greatest woman of the twentieth century," winning over such figures as Madeleine Albright and Madonna.

Film, book and theatrical portrayals
 

Actress Julia Jentsch as Sophie Scholl on trial in Sophie Scholl: The Final Days

In February 2005, a movie about Scholl's last days, Sophie Scholl – Die letzten Tage (Sophie Scholl: The Final Days), featuring actress Julia Jentsch in the title role, was released. Drawing on interviews with survivors and transcripts that had remained hidden in East German archives until 1990, it was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film in January 2006. In an interview, Jentsch said that the role was "an honor." For her portrayal of Scholl, she won the best actress at the European Film Awards, best actress at the German Film Awards (Lolas), along with the Silver Bear for best actress at the Berlin Film Festival.

Jud Newborn and Annette Dumbach's 1986 book about the White Rose, Shattering the German Night (Little, Brown) was reissued in a fully expanded, updated and illustrated edition in 2006, Sophie Scholl and the White Rose, to accompany the new film's release and provide the entire history of the White Rose.

There were three earlier film accounts of the White Rose resistance. The first film was financed by the Bavarian state government and released in the 1970s, entitled Das Versprechen (The Promise). In 1982, Percy Adlon's Fünf letzte Tage (Five Last Days) presented Lena Stolze as Sophie in her last days from the point of view of her cellmate Else Gebel. In the same year, Stolze repeated the role in Michael Verhoeven's Die Weiße Rose (The White Rose).

American playwright Lillian Garrett-Groag's play The White Rose features Sophie Scholl as a major character.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Scholl

Sophie Scholl
9 May 1921 - 22 February 1943  
The following information has been reproduced from a White Rose Foundation pamphlet entitled 'The White Rose'.

Born on May 9, 1921, when her father was mayor of Forchtenberg am Kocher, Sophie Scholl was the fourth of five children.  At age seven she entered grade-school;  she learned easily and had a carefree childhood. 

In 1930, the family moved to Ludwigsburg and two years later to Ulm, where her father had acquired a business consulting office. 

In 1932, Sophie started [attending] a secondary school for girls.  At the age of twelve, she joined the Hitler Youth, like most of her classmates.  Her initial enthusiasm gradually gave way to criticism.  She was aware of the dissenting political views of her father, of friends, and also of some teachers.  The political attitude now became an essential criterion in her choice of friends.  The arrest of her brothers and friends in 1937 left a strong impression on her. 

She had a talent for drawing and painting and for the first time came into contact with a few so-called 'degenerate' artists.  An avid reader, she developed a growing  interest philosophy and theology.  This was her alternative world to National Socialism.  
 
In the spring of 1940, she graduated from secondary school.  The subject of her essay was 'The Hand that Moved the Cradle, Moved the World.'  Being fond of children, she became a kindergarten teacher at the Fröbel Institute in Ulm-Söflingen.  She had also chosen this kindergarten job hoping that it would be recognized as an alternate service to 'Reichsarbeitsdienst' (National Labor Service), a prerequisite to be admitted to the University.  This was an error: from spring of 1941 on, she had to serve six months of auxiliary war service as a nursery teacher in Blumberg.  The military-like regimen of the Labor Service caused her to deliberate and practice passive resistance.  

In May 1942, at long last, she could enroll at the University of Munich as a student of biology and philosophy.  Her brother Hans, who was studying medicine there, introduced her to his friends.  Although this group of friends were eventually known for their political affairs, they were initially drawn together by a shared love of art, music, literature, philosophy and theology.  Hiking in the mountains, skiing and swimming were also of importance.  They often attended concerts, plays and lectures together. 

In Munich Sophie met artists, writers and philosophers, particularly Carl Muth and Theodor Haecker, who were important contacts for her concern with the Christian  faith.  Of foremost importance was the question of how the individual must act under dictatorship. 

During the summer vacation in 1942, Sophie Scholl had to do war service in a metallurgical plant in Ulm.  At the same time, her father was serving time in prison for a critical remark about Hitler to an employee.

In the early summer of 1942, Sophie had also participated in the production of the leaflets of the White Rose and their distribution.  She was arrested on February 18, 1943, while distributing the sixth leaflet at the University of Munich.  On February 22, 1943, Sophie, her brother Hans and their friend Christoph Probst were condemned to death and executed by guillotine only a few hours later.
*
Prison officials emphasized the courage with which she walked to her execution. 
 
http://www.jlrweb.com/whiterose/sophie.html

The White Rose

Back to Shoah| Facts & History | WR Sentence | Resistance | Rescuers |WhiteRose Members

"You know, Sophie, Jesus."



Sophie and Hans Scholl grew up in an somewhat unorthodox German family. Their family was religious, but had an ardent love for discussion; they were free growing up to form and express even unpopular opinions. They also grew up with a firm sense of responsibility for their fellowman, and a deep commitment to a faith that could see them through death.

Brilliant young people, they each headed eventually for the University of Munich, Hans first to Medical School [interrupted by a stint in the German armed forces] and Sophie, later, still undecided in her major, but having some experience in education, with a love for philosophy, music and the humanities. Both had a keen sense of politics: not only national politics but also of the politics of human understanding. Even as young people they wrote extensively, keeping journals and diaries, and they were exposed to many scholars, artists and musicians of the day, who despite the darkening skies of the Third Reich, held to their views and art, even when banned or censored.

As Hitler took office and consolidated the power of the presidency and the chancellory, brisk winds blew through the academic institutions of the time. University of Munich was one of the premier universities of Germany and it was no exception. In 1933 many Jewish scholars and professors were removed from their positions for having what was considered by the Reich to be 'degenerate' ideas, particularly Bolshevism.



Bolshevism was the name given to the early formations of the Communist party and ideals; it was more idealist. While it was a hated philosophy among the National Socialists (see Nazis)the term was often misapplied and became a 'catch-all' phrase to indicate any political or national group that was the object of prejudice. The Jews were among those who were consistently referred to by Hitler and Goebbels as Bolsheviks, regardless of their stance. It was into this politically-charged arena that Sophie and Hans Scholl entered their University years.

The Bishop, Euthanasia & a First Pamphlet

First White Rose Pamphlet

As Sophie and Hans went to Church one Sunday, they heard Bishop Galen speak of the emerging Euthanasia polices of the 3rd Reich. Hitler was with and without parental/familial permission, ending the lives of the mentally



retarded and mentally 'infirm' pharmacologically. It was in line with his Eugenics plan: Hitler as most of the Nazi hierarchy felt that the mentally-ill and developmentally delayed would contribute negatively to the 'bloodlines' of Europe. He also felt they were a burden on the state and should therefore be 'euthanized'.

Sophie and her family were horrified. She listened attentively to the Bishop's sermon, decrying the cruelty of such action; and the inhumane attitudes of the regime. Impressed deeply, she got permission to reprint the sermon in pamphlet form. She and other students handed out the pamphlet at the U of Munich, in opposition to the laws of the time. The Scholls and others were deeply influence by a faculty member with similar outrage to Hitler's policies. The Scholls, Chris Probst, and Professor Haber became the core of a non-violent resistance group on campus, comprised entirely of Germans. This Group was called, The White Rose (weisserose)2, named after a Spanish novel (Rosa Blanco). The Group coordinated efforts on Campus for Civil Rights and Opposition to Nazi policies. Among their efforts on campus were weekly discussion groups, painting 'freedom' on brick walls at the entrance into campus*, and distributing leaflets opposing the Reich on moral and political grounds, encouraging students to think for themselves.

The Jews were also of central concern to the group. Many try to dismiss German domestic responsibility in the Genocide of the Jews of Europe, claiming they did not know it was happening. Several of the Scholls' pamphlets describe the mass executions and deportations to Death Camps. It is clear that the information was available, though forbidden by Law. Free Speech was suspended in the Reich because it was felt to dampen the War Effort. Knowing the cost, (they made it clear in their writings) they continued their efforts, hoping to influence German opinion and bravery against the Nazi Regime. The reason the distribution of pamphlets was considered so treasonous is expressed below:

Since Hitler's Moods were said to be extraordinarily dependent on the sympathy of the masses, a reversal of feeling among the populace would have been a weapon of considerable force against him, one which would threaten his own self-confidence. FOR THESE REASONS the leaflets of the White Rose, were held by the highest levels of the party to constitute one of the greatest politcal "crimes" against the 3rd Reich. (p.96)

Good German CitizensThe Scholls, Probst and the others were not Jewish, Communist or violent dissenters. They were all German citizens, and the Scholls had been leaders in the Nazi Youth Party (hitlerjugend). He had been a flagbearer at a Party Rally in Nuremberg, and loved the Great
German philosopher.



Additionally, Hans had enlisted in the German Army: he fought for Germany. One day, however, he saw a young Jewish woman, under forced labor, digging a trench. The whole of what the Regime was doing struck his heart, he realized but for the grace of God, he could have been the one there, or his sister. He reached down to give her a flower and some food but she resisted, unappreciative of Nazi hospitality. He knew she was destined for one of the Killing Centers, or Concentration Camps, to an almost certain death. This event so struck his heart, that when he returned to Medical School, he devoted his life to his views and faith.

Sophie also had been a leader of a Nazi Youth Group. It is important to understand that they loved the Germany that was their Motherland: they wished only good for their countrymen. They had both received accolades and awards for their efforts as stellar German Citizens: these were not rebels, or delinquents with a chip on their shoulder, they were fine young people, pursuing an academic degree; who decided that even if their life was shorter than it might be it was still better to stand for the truth.

Imprisonment, Martyrdom & Death
 
On one of their last days before imprisonment, Hans & Sophie mimeographed several hundred more pamphlets. They knew that distribution was becoming more and more dangerous. In the early morning hours before classes began, the bulk of the leaflets were passed out, and in a symbolic gesture, Hans dropped many from a balcony, which fell like the petals of the White Rose. A building superintendent, Jakob Schmied,
betrayed them: in that day, every one was an informer.



Before 48 hours was over, the members of the White Rose had been arrested and charged with Treason: punishable by death. They were imprisoned at Stadelheim Prison and continued in prayer, knowing they were facing their death in their young 20s. On her way to sentencing before the "Peoples' Court" and a judge known for his intolerance, Sophie's Mother turned to her and said, "You Know, Sophie, Jesus". Sophie nodded in agreement. Sophie, Chris & Hans were sentenced to death by guillotine.

Hitler had brought it back as a means of execution because he found it threatening and foreboding and felt it would be a crime deterrent. Shortly after sentencing, in an unjust trial, with a court-appointed Nazi attorney, the young people of the White Rose were executed. The sentencing was brief, Dr. Freisler, presiding. See Table I for Results of Trial

"The People's Court has found but one just punishment: Death."

The two young people with a few others were executed following their February 18, 1943 arrest. Their great crime of making the truth known resulted in a cruel and unjust death. Hans once wrote a significant passage that sums up the motivation and heart of the young Scholls:

I lay no claim to age and experience but above and beyond the flickering blaze of my youthful soul, I sometimes detect the eternal breath of Something Infinitely Great and Serene. God. Fate. ...

and is most clearly expressed by the quote by Rilke that Hans kept in his pocket with a rosebud,

"He that holds his peace is wise, but he that speaks, speaks not for his own time."*

1 Mrs. Scholl, at Sophie's imprisonment & death
2Note: A semblance of the group continues today, and continues to fight worldwide injustices,
civil rights violations and inhumane policies. Their website may be found at www.whiterose.org.(check)
*NOTE: When the Scholls were arrested, the jailer was told to keep a few cells open. "Who is coming today?" he asked. "The Painters". was the reply.
3Scholl, Hans & Sophie, The Diaries of the White Rose
4Rilke, M. R. " Aufzeichnungen des Malte Laurids Briggess"

http://www.shoaheducation.com/whiterose.html

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
On February 22 in 1986 - Start of the People Power Revolution in the Philippines.

The People Power Revolution (also known as the EDSA Revolution and the Philippine Revolution of 1986) was a series of nonviolent and prayerful mass street demonstrations in the Philippines that occurred in 1986. It is sometimes referred to as the Yellow Revolution due to the presence of yellow ribbons during the arrival of Ninoy Aquino. These protests were the culmination of a long resistance by the people against the 20-year running authoritarian regime of then current president Ferdinand Marcos and made news headlines as "the revolution that surprised the world". The majority of the demonstrations took place at Epifanio de los Santos Avenue, known more commonly by its acronym EDSA, in Quezon City, Metropolitan Manila and involved over 200,000 Filipino civilians as well as several political, military, and religious figures, such as Jaime Cardinal Sin. The protests, fueled by a resistance and opposition of years of corrupt governance by Marcos, occurred from February 22 to 25 in 1986, when Marcos fled Malacañang Palace to the United States and conceded to Corazon Aquino as President of the Philippines.


Commemorative statue of the Revolution at Camp Aguinaldo
 
Background and History
 
The Marcos regime
 
Ferdinand Marcos was elected president in 1965, defeating incumbent Diosdado Macapagal by a very slim margin. During this time, Marcos was active in the initiation of public works projects and the intensification of tax collections, which brought the country into economic prosperity throughout the late 1960s. Marcos and his government claimed that they "built more roads than all his predecessors combined, and more schools than any previous administration. Amidst charges of vote buying and a fraudulent election, Marcos was reelected in 1969, this time defeating Sergio Osmeña Jr.

Marcos's second term for the presidency, however, was marred by allegations of widespread graft and corruption. The increasing disparity of wealth between the very wealthy and the very poor which made up the majority of the country's population led to the rise of crime and civil unrest around the country. These factors, including the formation of the New People's Army, an armed revolt that called for the redistribution of wealth and land reform in the Philippines, and a bloody muslim separatist movement in the southern island of Mindanao led by the Moro National Liberation Front, contributed to the rapid rise of civil discontent and unrest in the Philippines.

Marcos was barred from running for a third term as president in 1973, so on September 21, 1972, by virtue of a presidential proclamation (No. 1081), he declared martial law, citing rising civil disobedience as justification. Through this decree, Marcos seized emergency powers giving him full control of the Philippine military and the authority to suppress the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, and many other civil liberties. Marcos also dissolved the Philippine Congress and shut down media establishments critical of the Marcos government. Marcos also ordered the immediate arrest of his political opponents and critics. Among those arrested were Senate President Jovito Salonga, Senator Jose Diokno, and Senator Benigno Aquino Jr., the staunchest of his critics and the man who was groomed by the opposition to beat Marcos in the 1973 elections. Marcos would also abolish the Philippines' 1935 constitution and replace it with a parliamentary-style government (the Batasang Pambansa) along with a new constitution written by him. With practically all of his political opponents arrested and in exile, Marcos' pre-emptive declaration of martial law in 1972, and the ratification of his new constitution through political coercion, enabled him to effectively legitimize his government and hold on to power for another 14 years beyond his first two terms as president. At a period when the cold war still a political reality, Marcos's dictatorship ensured the political support of the United States by Marcos' promise to stamp out communism in the Philippines and by assuring the United States of its continued use of military and naval bases in the Philippines.



Pres. Ferdinand Marcos
 
Throughout his presidency, Ferdinand Marcos had set up a regime in the Philippines that would give him ultimate power over the military and the national treasury, as well as set up a personality cult. Following his declaration of martial law on September 21, 1972, Marcos immediately began to embezzle money from the government and order the military to kill any political competition against him. As a result, the Philippine economy began to tumble greatly, and the nation lost its competitive edge in Southeast Asia. He also ordered many stores, hotels, schools, universities, and other public places to place his Presidential picture prominently or otherwise their facilities were shut down. The media frequently "eulogizes" Marcos through public service announcements and news reports. Even billboard advertisements across the country were replaced with his propoganda messages on justifying his regime's actions. Marcos also ordered the shutdown and takeovers of businesses in the country, then put these businesses either under the government control, or under the control of Marcos cronies.

Several groups of people, however, even within the government, conspired throughout the term of the Marcos regime to overthrow him. They were led by the popular public figure, incarcerated opposition senator Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino Jr, who Marcos accused as leaning to a left-wing solution.

While gaining popularity amongst the Filipino people for his stance against Marcos, Aquino was eventually forced to seek exile in the United States for health and safety reasons. However, in 1983, Ninoy Aquino announced of his plans to return to the Philippines as a challenge to Marcos's illegitimate government.

Assassination of Benigno (Ninoy) Aquino

Despite warnings from the military and other pro-Marcos groups, and even by Ferdinand Marcos' wife Imelda, not to return to the Philippines, Ninoy Aquino was determined to return to the Philippines. Asked what he thought of the death threats, Ninoy Aquino responded "The Filipino is worth dying for."


The Manila Bulletin headline of Aquino's assassination on August 21, 1983

On August 21, 1983, after a three-year exile in the United States, as he disembarked from a commercial flight at the then-Manila International Airport (now named after him), Aquino was assassinated. His assassination shocked and outraged many Filipinos, most of whom by then had lost confidence in the Marcos administration. The event led to more suspicions on the government, triggered non-cooperation among Filipinos that eventually caused more civil disobedence. It also shook the Marcos government, which was by then deteriorating, in part due to Marcos' worsening health condition due to an eventual fatal illness (lupus erythematosus).

The assassination of Ninoy Aquino in 1983 caused the economic problems of the country to deteriorate even further, and the government plunged further into debt. By the end of 1983, the country was bankrupt, and the economy contracted by 6.8%.
 
In 1984, Marcos appointed a commission, led by Chief Justice Enrique Fernando, to launch an inquiry and investigation into Aquino's assassination. Despite the commission's conclusions, Cardinal Jaime Sin, the Archbishop of Manila at the time, declined an offer to join the commission, rejecting the government's views on the assassination. In October of that year, Marcos appointed a second commission to investigate. The commission's final report accused the military of staging a conspiracy to assassinate Aquino, dealing another major blow to the already collapsing government.

Calls for election
 
On November 23, 1985, after pressures from Washington, Marcos suddenly announced that a presidential snap elections would take place the following year, one year ahead of the regular presidential election schedule, to legitimize his control over the country. The snap elections was legalized with the passage of Batas Pambansa Blg. 883 (National Law No. 883) by the Marcos-controlled unicameral congress called the Regular Batasang Pambansa. The growing opposition movement encouraged Ninoy Aquino's widow, Corazon Aquino, to run for the presidency with Salvador Laurel as running mate for vice-president. Marcos ran for re-election, with Arturo Tolentino as his running mate. The Aquino-Laurel tandem ran under the United Opposition (UNIDO) party, while the Marcos-Tolentino ticket ran under the Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL) party.

The Election
 
The elections were held on February 7, 1986. The official election canvasser, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), declared Marcos the winner. The final tally of the COMELEC had Marcos winning with 10,807,197 votes against Aquino's 9,291,761 votes. On the other hand, the final tally of the National Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL), an accredited poll watcher, had Aquino winning with 7,835,070 votes against Marcos' 7,053,068 points. This electoral exercise was marred by widespread reports of violence and tampering of election results, culminating in the walkout of 29 COMELEC computer technicians to protest the deliberate manipulation of the official election results to favor Ferdinand Marcos. The walkout was considered as one of the early "sparks" of the People Power Revolution. The walkout also served as an affirmation to allegations of vote-buying, fraud, and tampering of election results by the KBL.

Because of reports of alleged fraud, the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) issued a statement condemning the elections. The United States Senate also passed a resolution stating the same condemnation. US president Ronald Reagan, a friend of Marcos, issued a statement calling the fraud reports as "disturbing". In response to the protests, COMELEC claimed that Marcos with 53 percent won over Aquino. However, NAMFREL countered that the latter won over Marcos with 52 percent of votes.
 
On February 15, Marcos was proclaimed by COMELEC and Batasang Pambansa as the winner amidst the controversy. All 50 opposition members of the Parliament walked out in protest. The Filipino people refused to accept the results, however, asserting that Aquino was the real victor. Both "winners" took their oath of office in two different places, with Aquino gaining greater mass support. Aquino also called for coordinated strikes and mass boycott of the media and businesses owned by Marcos's cronies. As a result, the crony banks, corporations, and media were hit hard, and their shares in the stock market plummeted to record levels.

Events of the revolution
 
Appalled by the apparent election irregularities, Juan Ponce Enrile, then secretary of National Defense, and some military officials tried to set in motion a coup attempt against Marcos that they have been planning for some time. However, after Marcos learned about the plot, he ordered their leaders' arrest. Threatened with their impending arrests, Enrile and his fellow coup plotters decided to ask for help from AFP Vice Chief of Staff Lt. Gen Fidel Ramos. Ramos agreed to resign from his position and support the plotters. Enrile also contacted the highly influential Catholic Archbishop of Manila Jaime Cardinal Sin for his support.

At about 6:30pm, February 22, Enrile and Ramos held a press conference at Camp Aguinaldo, where they announced that they have resigned their positions on Marcos's cabinet and are withdrawing support from his government. Marcos himself later conducted his own news conference calling on Enrile and Ramos to surrender, urging them to "stop this stupidity."
 
At about 9 p.m., in a message aired over Radio Veritas, Archbishop Sin exhorted Filipinos to come to the aid of the rebel leaders by going to EDSA between Camp Crame and Aguinaldo and giving emotional support, food and other supplies. For many, this seemed an unwise decision since civilians would not stand a chance against a dispersal by government troops. Nevertheless, many people, especially priests and nuns, trooped to EDSA.
 
Radio Veritas played a critical role during the mass uprising. Former University of the Philippines president Francisco Nemenzo stated that: "Without Radio Veritas, it would have been difficult, if not impossible, to mobilize millions of people in a matter of hours." Similarly, a certain account in the event said that: "Radio Veritas, in fact, was our umbilical cord to whatever else was going on."

Rising mass support
 

During the height of the revolution, an estimated one to three million people filled EDSA from Ortigas Avenue all the way to Cubao. The photo above shows the area at the intersection of EDSA and Boni Serrano Avenue, just between Camp Crame and Camp Aguinaldo.
 
At dawn, Sunday, government troops arrived to knock down the main transmitter of Radio Veritas, cutting off broadcasts to people in the provinces. The station switched to a standby transmitter with a limited range of broadcast. The station was targeted because it had proven to be a valuable communications tool for the people supporting the rebels, keeping them informed of government troop movements and relaying requests for food, medicine, and supplies.
 
Still, people came to EDSA until it swelled to hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians. The mood in the street was actually very festive, with many bringing whole families. Performers entertained the crowds, nuns and priests led prayer vigils, and people set up barricades and makeshift sandbags, trees, and vehicles in several places along EDSA and intersecting streets such as Santolan and Ortigas Avenue. Everywhere, people listened to Radio Veritas on their radios. Several groups sang Bayan Ko (My Homeland), which, since 1980, had become a patriotic anthem of the opposition. People frequently flashed the LABAN (fight) sign, which is an "L" formed with their thumb and index finger.

Shortly after lunch on February 23, Enrile and Ramos decided to consolidate their positions. Enrile crossed EDSA from Camp Aguinaldo to Camp Crame amidst cheers from the crowd.
 
In the mid-afternoon, Radio Veritas relayed reports of Marines massing near the camps in the east and tanks approaching from the north and south. A contingent of Marines with tanks and armored vans, led by Brigadier General Artemio Tadiar, was stopped along Ortigas Avenue, about two kilometers from the camps, by tens of thousands of people. Nuns holding rosaries knelt in front of the tanks and men and women linked arms together to block the troops. Tadiar threatened the crowds but they did not budge. In the end, the troops were forced to retreat with no shots fired.
 
By evening, the standby transmitter of Radio Veritas failed. Shortly after midnight, the staff were able to go to another station to begin broadcasting from a secret location under the moniker "Radyo Bandido" (Bandit Radio). June Keithley was the radio broadcaster who continued Radio Veritas' program throughout the night and in the remaining days.
 
More defections
 
At dawn on Monday, February 24, the first serious encounter with government troops occurred. Marines marching from Libis, in the east, lobbed tear gas at the demonstrators, who quickly dispersed. Some 3,000 Marines then entered and held the east side of Camp Aguinaldo.
 
Later, helicopters manned by the 15th Air Force Strike Wing, led by Major General Antonio Sotelo, were ordered from Sangley Point in Cavite to head to Camp Crame. Secretly, the squadron had already defected and instead of attacking Camp Crame, landed in it, with the crowds cheering and hugging the soldiers who came out. The presence of the helicopters boosted the morale of Enrile and Ramos who had been continually encouraging their fellow soldiers to join the opposition movement. In the afternoon, Aquino arrived at the base where Enrile, Ramos, RAM officers and a throng were waiting.
 
The capture of Channel 4
 
At around that time, June Keithley received reports that Marcos had left Malacañang Palace and broadcasted this to the people at EDSA. The crowd celebrated and even Ramos and Enrile came out from Crame to appear to the crowds. The jubilation was however short-lived as Marcos later appeared on television on the government-controlled Channel 4, declaring that he would not step down. It was thereafter speculated that the false report was a calculated move against Marcos to encourage more defections.
 
During this broadcast, Channel 4 suddenly went off the air. A contingent of rebels, under Colonel Mariano Santiago, had captured the station. Channel 4 was put back online, shortly after noon, with a voice declaring, "This is Channel 4. Serving the people again." By this time, the crowds at EDSA had swollen to over a million. (Some estimates placed them at two million.)

In the late afternoon, rebel helicopters attacked Villamor Airbase, destroying presidential vehicles. Another helicopter went to Malacañang, fired a rocket and caused minor damage. Later, most of the officers who had graduated from the Philippine Military Academy (PMA) defected; the majority of the Armed Forces had already changed sides.

"Marcos' finest hour"

The actual dialogue on TV went as follows:

Fabian Ver: We have to immobilize the helicopters they've got. We have two fighter planes flying now to strike at any time, sir.

Ferdinand Marcos: My order is not to attack.

Ver: They are massing civilians near our troops and we cannot keep on withdrawing. You asked me to withdraw yesterday....

Marcos (interrupting): My order is to disperse [them] without shooting them.

Ver: We cannot withdraw all the time...

Marcos:' No, no, no! Hold on. You disperse the crowds without shooting them. You may use any other weapon...

The inaugurations
 
On the morning of Tuesday, February 25, at around 7 a.m., a minor clash occurred between loyal government troops and the reformists. Snipers stationed atop the government-owned Channel 9 tower, near Channel 4, began shooting at the reformists. Many rebel soldiers surged to the station.
 
Later in the morning, Corazon Aquino was inaugurated as President of the Philippines in a simple ceremony at Club Filipino in Greenhills, about a kilometer from Camp Crame. She was sworn in as President by Senior Associate Justice Claudio Teehankee, and Laurel as Vice-President by Justice Vicente Abad Santos. The Bible on which Aquino swore her oath was held by Aurora Aquino, the mother of Ninoy Aquino. Attending the ceremonies were Ramos, who was then promoted to General, Enrile, and many politicians. Outside Club Filipino, all the way to EDSA, about hundreds of people cheered and celebrated. Bayan Ko (My Country, a popular folk song and the unofficial National Anthem of protest) was sung after Aquino's oath-taking. Many people wore yellow, the color of Aquino's campaign for presidency.

An hour later, Marcos conducted the inauguration at Malacañang. Loyalist civilians attended the ceremony, shouting "Marcos, Marcos, Marcos pa rin! (Marcos, Marcos, still Marcos!)". On the Palace balcony, Marcos took his oath as the President of the Philippines, broadcast by the remaining government television channels and channel 7. None of the invited foreign dignitaries attended the ceremony for security reason (although Moscow sent a congratulatory message). The couple finally stepped out in the balcony of the palace in front of the 3000 KBL loyalists who were shouting to Marcos: "Capture the snakes!" First Lady Imelda Marcos sang one more rendition of "Dahil Sa Iyo" (Because of You), the couple's theme song, rather tearfully, chanting her trademark Tagalog entreaties:

Because of you I attained happiness
I offer you my love
If it is true that you shall enslave me
All of this is because of you.

After the inauguration, the Marcos family and their close associates hurriedly rushed to leave the Palace. The broadcast of the event was also cut off as rebel troops successfully captured the other stations.

By this time, tens of hundreds of people had amassed at the barricades along Mendiola, only a hundred meters away from Malacañang. They were prevented from storming the Palace by loyal government troops securing the area. The angry demonstrators were pacified by priests who warned them not to be violent.


The Inquirer's headline on 26 Feb., 1986.
 
Marcos' departure
 
At 3:00 p.m., Monday, (American time) Marcos talked to United States Senator Paul Laxalt, asking for advice from the White House. Laxalt advised him to "cut and cut cleanly", to which Marcos expressed his disappointment after a short pause. In the afternoon, Marcos talked to Enrile, asking for safe passage for him and his family. Finally, at 9:00 p.m., the Marcos family was transported by four American helicopters to Clark Air Base in Angelese City, Pampanga, about 83 kilometers north of Manila, before heading on to Guam, and finally to Hawaii.

When the news of Marcos' departure reached the people, many rejoiced and danced in the streets. Over at Mendiola, the demonstrators were finally able to enter Malacañang Palace, long denied to Filipinos in the past decade. Looting by overly angry protesters occurred, but mostly people wandered inside, looking at the place where all the decisions that changed the course of Philippine history had been made.

Many people around the world rejoiced and congratulated Filipinos they knew. Bob Simon an anchorman at CBS said, "We Americans like to think we taught the Filipinos democracy; well, tonight they are teaching the world."
 
Aftermath
 
Despite the People Power Revolution, the democratic political system of the Philippines is still fragile and flawed. Patronage politics still hinders the development of democracy and resources are still at the hands of the few. There is still no "bill of rights" in the Philippines, and the Philippine government still controls 76% of the economy. However, the fall of Marcos and the collapse of the Communist movements has discouraged non-democratic alternatives to politics. The revolution also provided the restoration of democratic institutions after thirteen years of authoritarian rule. These institutions can be used by political and social actors to challenge the entrenched political clans and develop Philippine democracy.
 
Criticism
 
There are political writers, especially those living outside of Metro Manila, who associate the People Power Revolution with what they term as "Imperial Manila" because it was believed that Marcos was toppled from his position without the participation of Filipinos living in areas outside of the capital region. In an article published in Philippine Daily Inquirer, Amando Doronila wrote that:

People power movements have been an Imperial Manila phenomenon. Their playing field is EDSA. They have excluded the provincianos from their movement with their insufferable arrogance and snobbery ... ignoring the existence of the toiling masses and peasants in agrarian Philippines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_Power_Revolution