Pledge
of Solidarity - Second Version
A Leader Has
Questions About the Pledge
One Pledge
Author's Response to A Leader's Questions
Yet Another
Request
On Another
Page:
Keeping It
Catholic Addresses Twelve Problems with the
Pledge
Note from
Keeping It Catholic:
Below is the exact email sent to
homeschool leaders via TORCH's Inchi Sugarman, which was
forwarded to Marianna Bartold at Keeping It Catholic from
another homeschool leader. This email was intended to be
publicly
disseminated although not one
TORCH or NACHE leader personally ensured it reached Marianna
Bartold at Keeping It Catholic.
Neither
TORCH nor NACHE board members
have made any private or public attempt to contact Mrs. Bartold
concerning her articles on their collective activities and
principles. However, Mrs. Bartold has attempted to open
communications once more with both groups via Kimberly Hahn and
Mary Hasson, as well as Katie Moran of CHSNA. Mary Hasson of
TORCH and NACHE has acknowledged receipt of the contact via
email. No
replies have yet been forthcoming from any of the
aforementioned groups.
From:
TORCHMOM@aol.com
Subject: Homeschoolers'
Solidarity Pledge
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 08:30:49
EDT
Here is a
message from Julia Fogassy, a homeschool support group leader
inSeattle. This solidarity pledge is not a statement from TORCH
and Julia Fogassy is not a TORCH member; however, TORCH
supports this pledge of solidarity. If you have questions about
the statement itself, please direct them to Julia at
jfogassy@aol.com If you have questions about TORCH's support of
the statement, please e-mail me or Joan Stromberg
(strombergj@aol.com).
In Christ's service,
Inchi Sugarman
************************************
Letter
Introducing the Pledge(First Version)
Dear Friends,
This message is directed to
all Catholic homeschoolers and their supporters. It comes to
you from two ladies in the Pacific Northwest who have been
greatly saddened by some of the rhetoric that has found its way
into print in recent months.
Though we very much encourage
open discussion and lively debate on the many issues facing
Catholic homeschoolers today, we strongly believe that such
debate must at all times be guided by charity.
To that end, we submit the
following pledge for your consideration. We invite signatures
and support for this statement of solidarity. We encourage
priests, pastoral leaders, lay leaders, homeschooling parents,
and all Catholics to join us in this mutual pledge. If you
agree with the mission, goals and methods as stated below, and
are willing to abide by them in all public discourse, please
indicate your support in one of the following
ways:
1. Send a return email message
to me, indicating your support, including your full name,
address and zip code, the name of your local support group, and
what position, if any, you hold in the group.
2. Print a copy and return it by mail to:
Julia Fogassy
5530 S. Orcas St.
Seattle, WA 98118
JFogassy@aol.com
Please feel free to reprint
this invitation and pledge in your local
newsletters.
Sincerely,
Julia M. Fogassy
A
Pledge of Solidarity for Catholic Home Educators and Their
Supporters
(First
Version)
submitted by
Seattle homeschooling
leaders
Julia Fogassy and Katherine
Eames
MISSION
STATEMENT
Accepting with joy and
gratitude the children whom God has entrusted to us, we
solemnly pledge to the best of our abilities to fulfill our
sacred duty as parents by caring for the spiritual, mental,
and physical needs of our children. Our object is to hand on
to them, intact, the faith of the Holy Catholic Church,
which is our most precious possession.
GOALS
1. To support parents in
their "indispensable and primordial duty" as the primary
educators of their children while acknowledging the pastoral
responsibilities and lawful authority of the Church.
2. To foster an attitude of
filial love and respect towards our Church leaders in a
spirit of collaboration with and service to the Church's
mission to make disciples.
3. To serve all Catholic home
educators with humility and joy, recognizing with Pope John
Paul II the awesome truth that, "The future of humanity
passes by way of the family."
4. To model hope and courage,
rather than despair and fear, in meeting the challenges of
our day, with the secure knowledge that our ultimate victory
is already won in Christ. In the words of His Holiness, Pope
John Paul II, "Be not afraid!"
5. To recognize and affirm
principles of discernment for parents and ecclesial
authorities as they seek to safeguard parental rights and
responsibilities.
6. To emphasize the virtue of
prudence as the sure guide for parents as they discern
between influences which may threaten or enhance the faith
formation of their children.
7. To help form parents in the
Catholic faith, encouraging them to choose materials that
best meet the needs of their children.
8. To foster all worthy
efforts of communication, parent education, and among
Catholic home educators.
METHODS
Knowing that the
sacred duty of caring for the spiritual, mental, and
physical needs of our children is best carried out, not
in isolation, but within the wider context of the
local community and the universal Church, we
acknowledge that varying opinions and conflicts will
arise. Recognizing that scandalous divisions in the Body
of Christ are directly opposed to the will of God, and
that we are morally obliged to maintain Christian
unity,we embrace St. Augustine's maxim:
In matters
of doctrine, unity;
In matters not
doctrinal, liberty;
In all things,
charity.
PLEDGE
Therefore, we mutually pledge the
following:
1. When conflicts arise,
we will first separate the person from the issue and then
determine whether the matter is essential to the faith. If the
concern is a matter of doctrine, we will clearly identify it
as such and work towards unity.
2. If the concern is not
doctrinal, we will clearly identify it as such and
acknowledge the liberty to differ.
3. In dealing with all
differences, we will practice charity; charity means
following the scriptural mandate to communicate directly to
the person, assuming the best motives, and confining the
discussion to examining issues, not attacking
persons.
Signed
_________________________________________
address_________________________________________
_________________________________________
group
name______________________________________
position
_________________________________________
Pledge of Solidarity - Second
Version
A
Pledge of Solidarity for Catholic Home Educators and Their
Supporters
(Second
Version)
submitted by
Seattle homeschooling
leaders
Julia Fogassy
and Katherine Eames
MISSION
STATEMENT
Accepting with joy and
gratitude the children whom God has entrusted to us, we
solemnly pledge to the best of our abilities to fulfill our
sacred duty as parents by caring for the spiritual, mental,
and physical needs of our children. Our object is to hand on
to them, intact, the faith of the Holy Catholic Church,
which is our most precious possession.
GOALS
1. To support parents in
their "indispensable and primordial duty" as the primary
educators of their children while acknowledging the pastoral
responsibilities and lawful authority of the Church.
2. To foster an attitude of
filial love and respect towards our Church leaders in a
spirit of collaboration with and service to the Church's
mission to make disciples.
3. To serve all Catholic home
educators with humility and joy, recognizing with Pope John
Paul II the awesome truth that, "The future of humanity
passes by way of the family."
4. To model hope and courage,
rather than despair and fear, in meeting the challenges of
our day, with the secure knowledge that our ultimate victory
is already won in Christ. In the words of His Holiness, Pope
John Paul II, "Be not afraid!"
5. To recognize and affirm
principles of discernment for parents and ecclesial
authorities as they seek to safeguard parental rights and
responsibilities.
6. To emphasize the virtue of
prudence as the sure guide for parents as they discern
between influences which may threaten or enhance the faith
formation of their children.
7. To help form parents
in the Catholic faith, encouraging them to choose materials
that best meet the needs of their children.
8. To foster all worthy
efforts of communication, parent education, and among
Catholic home educators.
METHODS
Knowing that the sacred
duty of caring for the spiritual, mental, and physical needs
of our children is best carried out, not in isolation, but
within the wider context of the local community and the
universal Church, we acknowledge that varying opinions and
conflicts will arise. Recognizing that scandalous divisions
in the Body of Christ are directly opposed to the will of
God, and that we are morally obliged to maintain Christian
unity, we embrace St. Augustine's maxim:
In
necessariis unitas,
In dubiis
libertas,
In omnibus
caritas.
PLEDGE
Therefore, we mutually
pledge the following:
1. When conflicts arise, we
will first separate the person from the issue and then
determine whether the matter is essential to the faith. If
the concern is a matter of necessity, we will clearly
identify it as such and work towards unity.
2. If the concern is not
essential to the faith, we will clearly identify it as such
and acknowledge the liberty to differ.
3. In dealing with all
differences, we will practice charity; charity
means following the scriptural mandate to communicate
directly to the person, assuming the best motives, and
confining the discussion to examining issues, not attacking
persons.
Signed________________________________________
address_________________________________________
_______________________________________________
group
name______________________________________
position
_________________________________________
The email below is a letter written by
Mary Ann Shapiro of California, Christ the King Academy Support
Group. It was originally sent to Catholic homeschool leaders
via email and did include Marianna Bartold at Keeping It
Catholic. It is printed here with permission from its author.
(Emphasis are KIC's.) You can email Mary Ann Shapiro at
ctka@usa.net
Dear Julia
(et.al.)
I am sorry that it has taken
me so long to respond to your email of 7/28. I have read the
pledge carefully, prayed about it, and spoken at length with my
husband.
I find I am unable to sign
this pledge for several reasons, discussed
below.
Let me say that I found myself
wanting to sign
just to go along.
Nobody wants to become "persona non grata," which seems to
happen to those who present disagreeing
positions.
But not wanting to offend is
not a reason to set aside valid concerns. I pray we are able to
continue discussions and grow in respect for each other. I will
try to make my objections brief but clear.
1. The
document itself has problems.
In the
document, under the goals, goal #1 is phrased in such a way as
to set up a dichotomy between laity and hierarchy. This
opposition is not
the intention of the Church. This goal should clearly state our
roles of working together to bring souls to
Christ.
In goal #4,
the phrase "model hope and courage, rather than despair and
fear" is used. My
experience has been that people who are trying to describe
scandalous situations in order to deal with them are accused of
"fear mongering" or "being divisive."
Such words are designed
to end
a conversation without dealing with the issues.
Faith in the
power of Almighty God
does not preclude intelligent and articulate understanding
of the challenges that face us.
Goal #8 must be missing some
words, because it is unintelligible as written.
The fact that the quote from
St. Augustine remained in
Latin
is
significant.
The maxim embraced in our
quest for unity could not be translated to the English language
(!) because an
agreement on 2 words could not be
reached, yet there are
only 9 words in the quotation.
The translation hanging over
my desk reads "essentials" and "non-essentials;" I have heard
"necessary" used, but never "doctrine."
2.
The
public use of this document.
Public use of this document
was not clarified. However, it has come to my attention through
private conversation, that
this pledge, with a list of signers, is to be published in the
next NACHE newsletter.
Is
this true? Why
was this not made clear when asking for
signatures?
Those who sign will be duly
noted. Those who do not will be conspicuous for their absence.
What opportunity will there be to make public the reasons for
not signing? Are
we fostering unity or forcing people to take
sides?
Further,
who
decides how and when
the pledge has been broken? Why is there
such a
rush to make the
pledge public? Suggested revisions made within a few days of
the first email were rejected because "it
was too late."
By
whose time frame?
3. Not
living up to the pledge already.
This pledge was prompted by
recent "rhetoric
that has found its way into print".
Does this refer in whole or part to articles by Mrs.
Marianna Bartold? How
interesting that a copy of the pledge was NOT sent to her. (I
called her to verify this).
Only 2 people have contacted her with specific complaints about
the facts of her articles, myself and 1 other
person.
What's the point of signing a pledge at the same time that you
are refusing to "communicate directly to the
person"?
Christian principles do not
apply to people only when when they agree with you. The mature
Christian must apply them at all times and in all
situations.
This complaining about the use
of rhetoric, as far as I can tell, has caused the facts of any
issue to be ignored. What
factual information reported was false?
I am not defending anyone, only asking a question. The
complaint has been that events were reported in a rude or
divisive way, but
no one has called to correct any errors, nor have the facts
been disputed in print.
Am I missing something?
The Catholic homeschooling
movement is dead if people are not allowed to speak
freely.
Along with the principles
already enunciated for dialog, maybe we should add the 11th
Commandment, "Thou shalt not take thyself too damned
seriously."
Offer up the pain of
misunderstandings and disagreements and look to the facts. It
simplifies the discussion, helps us make progress, and merits
grace. Not bad goals!
I do want unity. I do not want
Catholic homeschooling to be neutralized by bickering among
those of us perceived as leaders.
However,
signing a pledge to achieve the appearance of unity is not
unity.
Nor does unity necessarily
equal peace. A graveyard is peaceful, but everyone is dead.
Understanding and respect will be achieved by prayerfully
addressing the issues, especially those which cause great
disagreement.
Admitting we are wrong, or
maintaining fidelity to the truth without condemning or
excommunicating each other is only achieved with
grace.
To that end, I
would ask everyone to say 1 extra decade of the rosary each day
for a growth in the true unity we all already share by being
members of Christ's true Church.
May God bless you all and long
live Christ our King and Mary our Queen!
Mary Ann
Shapiro
ctka@usa.net
One Author's Response to Questions About
the Pledge
From Julia Fogassy
(Fogassy@aol.com) directed to Mary Ann Shapiro and other
homeschool leaders, including Marianna Bartold of Keeping It
Catholic. For
easier reading, Mrs. Fogassy's response remains
in
black, and her quotes of
Mary Ann
Shapiro's letter (printed above) are in
blue. No changes to the
words have been made, though red color emphasis has been added
by KIC. The letter is printed here with permission from its
author.
Dear Maryann, et.
al
Thanks for your thoughtful
reply to the Pledge Katherine and I sent out. Our goal is to
foster a climate in which Catholic homeschoolers of differing
opinions can express their concerns, be respectfully heard, and
solicit response.
We believe
that the public discourse has deteriorated to a scandalous and
unacceptable level which discourages us greatly.
In the present
situation we do not think silence is an option. You may or may
not agree.
After reading your responses
(see below) we invite you to add, subtract or rewrite whatever
parts of the Pledge you wish, suggesting a wording that would
be acceptable to you. We know this will take more of your time,
but we think the matter is serious enough to warrant your
input.
>>Dear
Julia (et.al.) I am sorry that it has taken me so long to
respond to your email of 7/28. I have read the pledge
carefully, prayed about it, and spoken at length with my
husband. I find I am unable to sign this pledge for several
reasons, discussed below. Let me say that I found myself
wanting to sign just to go along. Nobody wants to become
"persona non grata", which seems to happen to those who present
disagreeing positions. But not wanting to offend is not a
reason to set aside valid concerns. I pray we are able to
continue discussions and grow in respect for each other. I will
try to make my objections brief but clear. <<
JMF: Our point in offering the
Pledge was precisely to be "able to continue discussions and
grow in respect for each other." We definitely believe that
many of the concerns presently under discussion are valid,
while at the same time recognizing that Christians must never
stoop to calumny, slander, or detraction.
>> 1.
The document itself has problems. In the document, under the
goals, goal #1 is phrased in such a way as to set up a
dichotomy between laity and hierarchy. This opposition is not
the intention of the Church. This goal should clearly state our
roles of working together to bring souls to Christ.
<<
JMF: In the final version, (we
went through at least three versions before we finally settled
on one) Goal #1 states, "To support parents in their
indispensable and primordial duty as the primary educators of
their children in cooperation with the lawful authority of the
Church." Perhaps the word 'acknowledging", which was used in an
earlier version, conveyed a sentiment that we did not intend. I
do not know who suggested the change, but hopefully, it more
clearly expresses the attitude of mutual respect and
cooperation that should exist between the hierarchy and the
laity.
>> In
goal #4, the phrase "model hope and courage, rather than
despair and fear" is used. My experience has been that people
who are trying to describe scandalous situations in order to
deal with them are accused of "fear mongering" or "being
divisive". Such words are designed to end a conversation
without dealing with the issues. Faith in the power of Almighty
God does not preclude intelligent and articulate understanding
of the challenges that face us. <<
JMF: We are in complete
agreement with you about the need for continued discussion. It
is not at all our intention "to end the conversation without
dealing with the issues." In the letter that accompanied the
Pledge, we stated, "Though we very much encourage open
discussion and lively debate on the many issues facing Catholic
homeschoolers today, we strongly believe that such debate must
at all times be guided by charity."
>>Goal
#8 must be missing some words, because it is unintelligible as
written.<<
<<The
fact that the quote from St. Augustine remained in Latin is
significant. The maxim embraced in our quest for unity could
not be translated to the English language (!) because an
agreement on 2 words could not be reached, yet there are only 9
words in the quotation. The translation hanging over my desk
reads "essentials" and "non-essentials"; I have heard
"necessary" used, but never "doctrine". <<
JMF: We
really went round and round on this one.
Part of the problem is my faulty memory. Another part is my
narrow way of thinking. I knew I had a copy of the Latin
original somewhere, but I couldn't find it and I didn't want to
guess. I tried rephrasing the maxim in English, and didn't do
such a good job. Kimberly
Hahn expressed the same concerns you did and suggested the word
"essentials" instead of "doctrine." But I talked her out of
it.
When Father Fessio kindly
responded with your same objections, I humbly conceded. My
original reasoning was, "We MUST agree on matters of doctrine,
but people can endlessly debate what they think is essential or
non-essential, so doctrine is a safer word to
use."
But Father explained:
"I think
the translation of Augustine's adage is defective. (Then he
gave the original Latin.) "The translation you have used is
more restrictive than the Latin and I think building your
pledge upon it is problematic."
"An accurate
translation would be: unity in what is necessary; liberty in
what is open to question (or uncertain, or undecided); in all
things charity. My concern is this: Liturgy is not exactly the
same as doctrine; nor is Church discipline, But we must be
united on these things as well. The real distinction is between
what all Catholics must hold or accept, and what they are not
bound to hold or accept."
This little multi-input
process, done in charity, is a good example of how much thought
and communication it takes for someone like me to get the
picture. It is good that people like Kimberly and Father
Fessio, and now you, are willing to politely offer your
thoughts. We also emailed and telephoned Dr. Clark to request
her input and were directed to her son, Ken. He commented
briefly on the Pledge and has not yet communicated his final
response.
>> 2.
The public use of this document. Public use of this document
was not clarified. However, it has come to my attention through
private conversation that this pledge, with a list of signers,
is to be published in the next NACHE newsletter. Is this true?
Why was this not made clear when asking for signatures? Those
who sign will be duly noted. Those who do not will be
conspicuous for their absence. What opportunity will there be
to make public the reasons for not signing? Are we fostering
unity or forcing people to take sides?<<
JMF: Included in the original
transmission we stated: "We encourage priests, pastoral
leaders, lay leaders, homeschooling parents and all Catholics
to join us in this mutual pledge…Please feel free to
reprint this invitation and pledge in your local newsletters."
I have received emails from people around the country saying
that the pledge will be reprinted in several newsletters or
periodicals.
I certainly hope that it will
appear in many. It is our intention to spread it widely. Anyone
has our permission to reprint it and solicit additional
signatures.
We hope that
those whose signatures appear will be "duly
noted", just as you
suggest. We believe that certain norms must govern the public
discourse of Christians, and we appreciate knowing of others
who are willing to hold themselves accountable for a common
standard of conduct. Another benefit is to allow persons with
limited time resources (like ourselves)to dialogue with members
of the self-selected group. We understand this to be a
positive, not a problem.
Anyone is free to write a
letter to the editor of any periodical in which the Pledge
appears, expressing his or her viewpoint. I expect there will
be some who choose not to offer the Pledge to their members,
and still others who comment unfavorably on it. We welcome all
such discussion.
I would hesitate to use the
phrase "forcing
people to take sides".
What Katherine and I meant to do was to state
what
we believe is the best
way to deal with the present issues, and to invite others to
join us.
>>
Further, who decides how and when the pledge has been broken?
Why is there such a rush to make the pledge public? Suggested
revisions made within a few days of the first email were
rejected because "it was too late". By whose time frame?
<<
>>
3. Not living up to the pledge already. This pledge was
prompted by recent "rhetoric that has found its way into
print". Does this refer in whole or part to articles by Mrs.
Marianna Bartold? How interesting that a copy of the pledge was
NOT sent to her. (I called her to verify this). Only 2 people
have contacted her with specific complaints about the facts of
her articles, myself and 1 other person. What's the point of
signing a pledge at the same time that you are refusing to
"communicate directly to the person"?<<
>>
This complaining about the use of rhetoric, as far as I can
tell, has caused the facts of any issue to be ignored. What
factual information reported was false? I am not defending
anyone, only asking a question. The complaint has been that
events were reported in a rude or divisive way, but no one has
called to correct any errors, nor have the facts been disputed
in print. Am I missing something? <<
JMF: Hopefully, I will address
these concerns in the article that I'm working on (and who
knows when it might ever see the light of day?).
However, just as one example,
consider the opening sentence in Marianna's June article: "As
the Catholic homeschool movement grows, so does the dilution of
authentic Catholic education." This is a very broad, very
negative, and, based on my eleven years of homeschooling
experience and contact with thousands of homeschoolers around
the country, a very false statement.
Maybe the
majority of Catholic homeschoolers that Marianna knows
are,
purposefully diluting the truth, distorting the faith, and
leading their children into error,
but
I do not believe such a statement can be made about Catholic
homsechoolers in general, nor about Kimberly Hahn and Mary
Hasson in particular. Yet this very allegation is the focus of
her entire article.
We believe, that for a
Christian, facts
are not the only issue,
and to
hide a slanderous personal attack
behind a claim of "fact" is clearly wrong. We hope to model
(not only for homeschool leadership, but also for our own
children) another way of airing differences. As homeschoolers,
everything we do has the opportunity to be a "teaching moment".
We would be embarrassed if our children behaved on the church
play ground the way some homeschool leaders have behaved in the
public forum.
More importantly, if such
behavior occurred, we
could not in conscience remain silent.
Between us we have nine adult children who are aware of the
present discussions. Our response and the way in which it is
expressed will not go unnoticed. We suspect we are not
alone.
(The remainder of
this email consisted of the end quotes from
Mary Ann
Shapiro's
email which is published directly above this
letter.)
Yet Another Request
Dear Sisters
in Christ,
I have been
observing the discussions and dialogs regarding the proposed
pledge for Catholic homeschooling. I have shared your
discussions with the members of my ISP, Cabrini Academy.
We are sorry
that the fighting within Catholic homeschooling has escalated
to the point that a pledge of this nature is seen as a
solution. We believe that prayer is the only solution to
this problem and we are basing our belief upon our own
experiences as homeschooling mothers.
Let us
explain. Cabrini Academy was started to support an small group
of Catholic homeschooling families in the San Francisco Bay
Area who face major trials inwhich HSLDA is unable to assist
them. We have one family whose husband/father is unjustly
imprisoned. Another family homeschools their adopted special
needs daughter (heart disease, spina bifida and club feet are
some of her disabilities) while the child's birth mother is
demanding her return. Another family is suffering the effects
of an angry ex-husband/father who is seeking custody of his
children and demanding a court order to stop
homeschooling.
It is an
endless parade of judges, lawyers, social workers and
psychologists that cross our families paths on a daily, weekly
and monthly basis while they struggle to homeschool their
children. Yet we have experienced God's greatness and mercy in
spite of these seemingly hopeless situations.
Through
Eucharistic Adoration, devotion to Divine Mercy,and the daily
Rosary
we have seen our hope, our joyful confidence in God, fortified
and working. For example, the State Supreme Court has agreed to
hear the appeal that was filed. The court must make its
decision by October 5, Blessed Faustina's feast day. The social
workers in the adoption case have sided with our family. That
in itself is a miracle.
Their
recommendation to the judge is that a homeschooling environment
is in the child's best interest. The ex-husband/father was
forced to settle out of court in our family's favor. The high
powered attorney he hired refused to represent him after he saw
the list of witnesses for the defense, which was submitted to
the judge.
Seton Home
Study, Thomas Aquinas College and Cabrini Academy all agreed to
testify on the validity of homeschooling. This cooperation
among fellow Catholics along with Adoration, Divine Mercy and
the Rosary had the attorney tell his client (and this is a
direct quote) "We can't win. They will blow us out of the
water."
If Eucharistic
Adoration, Divine Mercy devotions and daily rosary can bring
about comfort and victory in the midst of major adversity, just
think what it can do for the unification of all homeschoolers.
If there is a
need for a pledge, how about one that offers this type of
prayer, on a daily basis, for the Catholic homeschooling
movement? It could be any type of prayer, but in our
experience, we can not think of a more powerful combination
than Adoration, Divine Mercy and a daily rosary.
Our Lord told
Sr. Lucia of Fatima that the greatest sacrifice anyone can make
in the 20th century would be devotion to daily duty.
Perhaps
this is the area where Catholic homeschoolers need to come
together and make this their battle cry. We really don't have
time for anything else, especially when we are busy with our
families, which means we are busy with eternity.
In the year
2013, I will be closing my ISP, God willing, because we will
be finished homeschooling all of our children. It is our group's
intention to go to Tahiti for a long vacation, and then on to
Northern Greenland just for the experience. You are all welcome
to join us. We will be wearing our not-so-famous T-shirts that
say "Cabrini Academy, got a lawyer?" In the meantime, dear
sisters, life is short and we all need to get a life in Christ
and pray hard.
In Jesus and
Mary,
Fran
Wise
Keeping
It Catholic Addresses Twelve Problems with the
Pledge
Back
to Home Page
