Suchergebnisse

Issue 1.3 of the Review for Religious, 1942. ; Review for Religious MAY 15, 1942 The General Chapter of Elections . Adam C. Ellis Retreat Resolutions . Clarence McAuliffe Reparation to the Sacred Heart . Malachi J. Donnelly The, Pivotal Point of Good Will . G. Augustln~ Ellard Scruples Versus the Human Way . ~ Gerald Kelly Hints for Sacristans . Gerald Ellard The Presumed Permission . ¯ . James E. Risk Book Reviews )uestions Answered E)ecisions of the Holy See VOLUME NUMBER 3 REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS VOLUME I MAY 15. 1942 NUMBER CONTENTS. THE GENERAL CHAPTER OF ELECTIONS IN A RELIGIOUS CONGREGATION Adam C. Ellis, S.3 . 146 FOR CHURCH MUSICIANS . " . 156 RETREAT RESOLUTIONS---Clarence McAuliffe, S.J . 157 BOOKS RECEIVED . , . 166" ¯ SOME PAMPHLETS . 166 REPARATION IN THE DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART Malachi J. Donnelly, S.J. . ." . . . 167 THE PIVOTAL POINT OF EFFECTIVE GOOD WILL G. Augustine Ellard, S.J . 170 SCRUPLES VERSUS THE HUMAN WAY---Gerald Kelly. S.J. 187 HINTS FOR SACRISTANS~erald Ellard, S.J . 194 THE PRESUMED PERMISSION--Jame$.,E~. Risk. S.J . 196 BOOK REVIEWS PRINCIPLES OF CHRISTIAN AND RELIGIOUS PERFECTION . 206 BLESSED ARE THEY THAT HUNGER By the Reverend Richard Graef, C.S.Sp. 206 THE MASS OF BROTHER MICHEL. By Michael Kent . 207 FAST BY THE ROAD. By John Moody . ; 208 THE CATHOLIC REVIVAL IN ENGLAND. By John ,J. O'Connor 209 MEDIEVAL HUMANISM. By the Reverend Gerald G. Walsh, S.J. 209 DECISIONS OF THE HOLY SEE OF INTEREST TO RELIGIOUS 210 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Extension of Temporary Vows; Use df Parish School Funds; Is Reli-gious Habit a Sacramental; Days of Abstinence during Lent; Languages during Canonical Year; Inspection of Letters: Administration of Anes-thetics: Aspirant of East Syrian Rite: Converts from Greek Orthodox Church; Indulgence for Kissing Habit: Extending Period of Probation: Chanting of Little Office; Working during Evening Recreation 211 REVIEW FOR RELIGIOUS, May, 1942. Vol. I, No. 3. Published bi-monthly: January, March, May, July, September, and November, at The College Press, 606 Harrison Street; Topeka, Kansas, by St. Mary's College, St. Marys, Kansas, with ecclesiastical approbation. Entered as second class matter January 15, 1942, at the Post Office, Topeka, Kansas, under the act of March 3, 1879. Editorial Board: Adam C. Ellis, S.J., G. Augustine Ellard, S.J., Gerald Kelly, S.d. Copyright, 1942, by Adam C. Ellis. Permission is hereby granted for quotations of reasonable length, provided due credit be given this review and the author. Subscription price: 2 dollars a year. PHnted in U. S. A. The General Chap!:er ot: I::lect:ions in a Religious Congregat:ion Adam C. Ellis, S.3. BY CHAPTER in a reli.gious institute is meant the lawful assembly of those members to whom the con-stitutions give the right to vote when matters of im-portance are to be discussed and decided. Chapters may be general, provincial, or local, according as they represent an entire institute (order or congregation), or a province, or a local community. Provincial and local chapters meet, as a rule, only for the election of delegates to the general or provincial chapter respectively. In this article we are concerned only with the g.eneral chapter, though many of its provisions will apply equally well to a provincial or local chapter. An ordinarg general chapter is convoked at the times prescribed by the constitu-tions-~ every three or six years, or at other regular inter.- vals. An extraordinar~ general chapter is ofie convoked outside the time of the ordinary chapter~ Constitutions approved by the Holy See usually prescribe that an ex-traordinary chapter may not be convoked without the per-missioh of the Holy See, except in the case of the death or resignation of the superior general. The purpose of the general chapter is two-fold: to elect superiors, and to transact other important business. The first kind of chapter is usually called the chapter of elections; the second, the business chapter, or the chapter of affairs. We are dealing here with the chapter of elections only, which is governed by the regulations of the Code of Canon Law as well as by the provisions of the constitu-tions which are not contrary to the Code (cf. canon 507. §1). 146 CHAPTER OF ELECTIONS Time, Place, and Cor~oocation of Chapter. The common law of the Church does not prescribe any particular place for the meeting of the general chapter of elections. The constitutions usually allow the superior general to determi.ne the date and place of the chapter, with the deliberative vote of his council. Sometimes, however, they prescribe that the chapter be held in the motherhouse, and set the day for it as well. In the absence of any definite regulations of the constitutions, the superior general with his council is free to determine the day on which the chap-ter is to be held, as well as its meeting-place. This is true even in the case of a diocesan congregation of religious women which has houses in more than one diocese, as was declared by the S. Congregation of Religious on June 17, 1921, when it explicitly stated that the choice of the meet-ing- place of the chapter rested with the superior general, and not with the local Ordinary in whose diocese the moth-erhouse is located. At the same time the S. Congregation declared that the right to preside over the election in the case mentioned belonged to the local Ordinary in whose diocese the election took place, hence not to the Ordinary of the motherhouse, unless the election is held in his dio-cese. Pope Benedict XV confirmed these decisions and ordered them to be published. The day and place of the general chapter having been determined upon, the superior general will then convoke the chapter, usually by means of a circular letter to be sent to all those who have a right to assist at the chapter. The constitutions usually pr.escribe that such letters are to be sent at least three, if not six, months before the day on which the chapter is to meet. An error in convoking the chapter does not make the election invalid unless one third of those who have a right to attend have not been sum-moned and, by reason of this irregularity, have not taken 147 ADAM C. ELLIS part in the voting (cf. canon 162, § 3). Electors or Members of the Chapter The constitutions will determine who have a right to take part in a chapter of elections. The following are com-monly members of such a chapter: 1. The superior general; 2. The members of his council; 3. All ex-superiors general; 4. The secretary general; 5. The treasurer general; 6. Provincials and two or more delegates from each province, if there are provinces; 7. Local superiors, and delegates of the various houses chosen according to the constitutions. The common law of tl~e Church prescribes that reli-gious with temporary vows have neither active nor pas-sive voice1 unless the constitutions explicitly grant it to them. The constitutions sometimes grant active voice to religious with temporary vows, seldom if ever passive voice. The number of years required by the constitutions for the enjoyment~ of active and passive voice is tO be counted from the" first profession of temporary vows, un-less the constitutions provide otherwise (cf. canon 578, 30). It is customary to elect substitutes for all delegates who are elected to take part in a chapter of elections. These substitutes take the place of such delegates as are impeded or who do not wish to attend the chapter. Unless the con-stitutions declare otherwise, the religious who have been elected delegates may give up their right to attend the chap-ter. XActive voice is the tight to vote: passive voice is the right to be voted for or to be elected to an ot~ce, 148 CHAPTER OF ELECTIONS Prelirainar~.t Session of Chapter In a preliminary session of the .chapter it is customary to examine the credentials of all the delegates to the chap-ter. This having been done, the assembly proceeds by se-cret vote to the election of at least two "scrutineers".0r tellers (cf. canon 171, § 1), unless these are already desig-nated by the constitutions. They must be elected from among the members of the chapter. After being elected they take an oath to fulfill their of Iice faithfully, and to observe secrecy regarding everything done in the chapter of elections. A secretary is usually elected in a similar man-ner, unless one of the tellers acts in this capacity. General Regulations Regarding Voting On!y those religious who are actually present in the chapter have a right to vote. Votes sent in by mail or cast by proxy are forbidden and invalid, unless the constitu-tions or a special privilege granted by the Holy See author-ize the employment of those methods (cf. canon 163). An exception., however, is made in favor of members of the chapter who are in the house but unable to attend the meetings because of illness. Such a person's vote given in writing shall be collected by the tellers and placed with the other votes, unless particular laws or a legitimate custom determine otherwise (cf. canon 168). All must abstain from seeking votes either directly or indirectly for themselves or for others, and no one may validly vote for himself (cf. canons 507, § 2, 170). This does not forbid the members-of the chapter from seeking information from one another regarding the qualities of this or that religious. The constitutions frequently pro-vide for such an opportunity before the day of the election. All votes must be freely given. A vote directly or indirectly extorted by grave fear or fraud in favor of a 149 ADAM C. ELLIS determined person, or of one of a group of persons, is an invalid vote (cf. canon 169, §.1). In order to be valid, a vote freely cast for an eligible candidate must have four qualities: it must be secret, cer-tain, absolute, and determined (cf. canon 169, § 2). Each one of these qualities demands a brief explanation. A secret vote. This means that no member of the chapter may make known to another, the pers6n for whom he voted. A vote which is made public is by that very fact invalid. However, for special reasons, a member of the chapter may declare before the president and the tellers which person he wishes to vote for. The vote is secret, since all the persons to whom it is made. known are bound under oath. not to reveal it. Though not strictly speaking required by law, a written ballot is the most common and most convenient form of carrying on the election and safe-guards the secrecy req.uired. It would seem to be the only form contemplated by the Code. A certain vote. In order to be certain the vote must glare the full name of the person v6ted for so as to distin-guish him from all other persons having a similar name. A vote cast for "the person who will receive the majority of the votes," is an uncertain vote. A vote which cannot be read, or understood, is likewise uncertain; as is also a blank vote. An absolute vote. Each vote must be free from all con-ditions. A vote cast for Peter "provided he is fifty years old," would be an invalid vote. If the condition, however, merely expresses a requirement of the law for the valid election of the person voted for, the. vote would not be invalid: But such conditions should not be put in the vote when given since they are presupposed. A determined vote. An alternative vote is invalid. 150 CHAPTER OF ELECTIONS Such would be, for example, a vote cast for "either Peter or Paul." In conclusion it may be well to note that an invalid vote does not make the balldt in which it is cast invalid. Such an invalid vote is simply not.counted. By accident it may keep the person for whom it was given from getting the required majority of votes. The Election of the Superior General -Before the voting begins for the election of higher superiors in institutes of religious men, all and each of the members of the chapter shall promise under oath to elect those whom they deem before God should be elected (cf. canon 506, § 1). This oath is not required of reli-gious women. In institutes of religious men the superior general pre-sides over the election unless the constitutions provide otherwise. In congregations of religious women the elec-tion of the mother general is presided over by the Ordinary of the place in which the election is held. He may preside personally or through a delegate (cf. canon 506, § 4). For the election of superiors the common law requires an absolute2 majority of votes on either the first or second ballot, while a relative majority suffices on the third ballot, If, on the third ballot, the highest number of votes is given equally to two or more persons, the presiding officer may determine the election by casting his vote, but never in his own favor. Should he decline to do so, then the senior by reason of ordination, or of first profession, or of age, shall be regarded as elected (cf. canon 101, § 1, 1°). Theconsti- 2An absolute majority is constituted by any number exceeding half the number of valid votes cast, for instance, 9 out of 16, 10 out of' 19, and so forth. The person receiving the greatest number of votes cast is said. to have a plurality or relative majority of the votes cast when that number does not constitute an absolute majority of all the'votes cast. Thus, in a chapter in which 25 votes are cast,-,John may receive 11, Peter 8, and Paul 6. ,John has a relative majority. 151 ADAM C. ELLIS tutions may require a greater number of votes, for instance, a two-thirds majority for the election of the superior gen-eral. Constitutions approved by the Holy See usually require that :a fourth ballot be taken in case the third ballot does not result in an absolute majority. ¯ In this fourth bal-lot only the two religious who have received the greater number of votes on the third ballot are eligible for election, though they themselves are excluded from voting on the fourth ballot. In case this fourth ballot results in a tie, the election is determined by priority of ordination, or of first profession, or of age, respectively as mentioned above. The Voting Process When all are prepared the voting begins. It is the duty of the tellers to see to it that the votes be cast by each elector secretly, diligently, separately, and according to the order of precedence (cf. canon 171, § 2). No particular form of collecting the votes is prescribed by the common law, though the constitutions usually determine some detailed method, for instance, the tellers carry a locked box into which each member casts his sealed vote, or the members proceed slowly, one by one, to-the table or desk of the presiding officer, and there deposit their votes in an urn or box, under the watchful eyes of the tellers. When all the votes have been thus.collected, the tellers shall examine in the presence of the presiding officer, according to the manner prescribed by the particular con-stitutions or legitimate customs, whether the number of votes corresponds to the number of electors. Should the number of votes exceed the number of electors, the ballot is invalid (cf. canon 171, §§ 2 and 3), the ballots are destroyed, and a new vote taken. If the number of ballots does not exceed that of the number of electors, they are opened one by one so as to be seen by both tellers, and by 152 " CHAPTER OF ELECTIONS the presiding officer, and noted down by the secretary. After the votes have been counted the presiding officer or one of the tellers announces to the chapter how many votes each candidate has received. This may be done in either of two ways. After each vote is opened and inspected by the tellers and the presiding officer, the name of the person voted for is read aloud.-Or after the votes have been counted, the final results may be read to the chapter by the presiding officer or by one of the tellers. The constitutions or custom will determine the method to be followed. The votes are to be burned immediately after each bal-lot, or at the end of the session if several ballots were taken during it (cf. canon 171., § 4). When the election of the superior general has been com-pleted according to the prescribed formalities, the presiding officer will declare it lawful, proclaim it, and receive the oath of the newly elected superior general. Thereupon the religious both of the chapter and of the community will make their obedience according to custom. All the acts of the election shall be diligently written down by the secretary and, after being signed at least by him, by the presiding officer, and by the tellers, they shall be carefully preserved in the archives of the congregation (cf. canon 171, § 5). Acceptance and Confirmation of the Election The announcement of the result of the election made to the chapter is sufficient notification if the person elected is present; if he is not present the result should be officially communicated to him, and he is to be summoned to the chapter, all further business of which is suspended until his arrival. Unless the constitutions state the contrary, the reli-gious elected is not obliged to accept the office. Should he 153 ADAM C. ELLIS renounce it; he loses all the rights connected with the same, and a new election is held. In the case of diocesan congregations of religious women, the election of the mother general must be con-firmed by the Ordinary who presides over it. For grave reasons, according to his conscience, he may refuse to con-firm the election (cf. canon 506, § 4). In that case, how-ever, he may not appoint the superior general, but a new election must be held. Postutaiion It may fiappen that the members of a chapter wish to have for their superior a religious who is able and worthy to fill that office, but who is excluded from it by some impediment of church law from which the-competent ecclesiastical ~uperior can and is accustomed to dispense. Such a person cannot be validly] elected, but the members of the chapter may postulate him, provided that he receives two-thirds of. the votes of the chapter (cf. canons 179, § 1; 180, § 1)which means that they ask the Holy See to grant the necessary dispensation. Postulation, however, may be admitted only in an extraordinary case and provided the constitutions do not forbid it. (cf. canon 507, § 3). In a letter addressed to the local Ordinaries of the world on March 9, 1920, the S. Congregation of Religious instructed them to be very strict in allowing postulation in the case of the superior general of a congregation of religious women who has just com-pleted two terms of office. In such a case the simple desire of the members of the chapter to re-eleCt the same superior, or the mere ability of the person to fill the office, is not a sufficient reason for postulation. If, however, other grave reasons seem to require the choice of the same person beyond the time allowed by the constitutions, the Ordinary must 154 CHAPTER OF ELECTIONS send a petion to the S. Congregation, in which it is clearly stated what the reasons are, how many ballots were taken, and how many votes were in favor of the person postu-lated. Finally the OMinary must state his own opinion in the matter. The S. Congregation will then give a decision. The fact that the constitutions expressly allow postulation does not excuse from the requirements of this instruction. In case of postulation the members of the chapter who wish to vote for an ineligible person, must write on their ballot: "I postulate N. N." Election of Other Officers The newly elected superior general presides over the election of the other officers to be chosen by the general chapter, unless the constitutions allow the Ordinary the right of presiding likewise at the election of the members of the general council. These elections are usually held in a separate session Of the chapter. The manner of voting is the same as that employed in the election of the superior general. An absolute majority of votes is required on the first and second ballot. If no one has received such a major2 ity, a third ballot is taken in which a relative majority is sufficient. ,If on this third ballot two or more candidates receive an equal number of votes, the presiding officer may cast a deciding vote, though he is not .obliged to do so. If he declines to use his right, the person who is senior by ordi-nation, or by first profession, or by age, is considered elected. The constitutions may provide for a fourth bal-lot in case the third re.sults in a tie. If the person elected is not a member of the chapter, he must be summoned at once, but the chapter does not await his arrival in order to continue its business. After the elections are over, the former superior gen-eral, the members of his council, the secretary general and 155 ADAM G. ELLIS the treasurer general, usually continue to sit in chapter with active voice as long as it r~mains in'session, even though they may have been replaced in their offces by other reli-gious. Should the superior general die during his term of offce, or resignbefore its completion, the assistant superior gen-eral will take his place in the government of the community and will ~onvoke an extraordinary chapter in which dec-tions will be held not only for a new superior general, but also for all the other offices which are usually filled by election in general chapter. The reason for this is that all ¯ the officers elected in a general chapter hold office from chapter to chapter, rather than for a "definite number of years. FOR CHURCH MUSICIANS Of unusual yalue to religious and seminarians working in the field c~f church music is 'the new Catholic Choirmasters' Correspon-derice Course. Four semesters of ~olle'giate° work, accredited by St. Albertus College Department of Music, are done under personal tutorship and will be coricluded with summer schools in 1943 and 1944. The lessons have been prepared by a~ faculty international in personnel and repute, including Dom Desrocquettes0 Dr. Becket Gibbs, Dom Ermin Vitry, Father Gerald Ellard, and others. Zest and .authority characterize their teaching, and phonograph recordings assist amply in problems that need the living voice. General' editor is Clifford Bennett, Gregorian Institute, 1515 Berger Building, Pittsburgh, Pa. Those interested may obtain an attractive pros-pectus by writing to the General Editor. 156 Retreat Resolutions Clarence McAuliffe, S.3. AS ~WEGO ON in the religious life, certain practices, n6t binding under pain of sir/, but nevertheless, of paramount importance in their bearing on the whole spiritual structure, become increasingly .difficult. Among these are the particular examination of conscience, certain rules governing religious discipline, such as the rule of silence, and the formulation of apt resolutions during re-treat. That the delicate web of religious virtues clings for partial support upon the particular examen is admitted by all ascetical writers. The same holds true for the rule of silence, since its utter neglect means the undermining of the spirit of prayer and recollection. But the resolutions we take in our annual retreat are even of greater moment since the continued practice of the particular examen and the preservation of a prayerful disposition depend in no small measure upon them. If we reflect on our happy novitiate days, we shall remember that we experienced no difficulty in making resolutions and recording them. We jotted them down carefully as tokens of our affection for our Divine Savior Who alone besides ourselves knew what they were. We may still have them. We may smile now at some of their characteristics. No doubt we took too many resolutions; we aimed too often at purely external practices; we may even have aspired to fanciful performances. But we can-not deny that they did us good. They kept us fervent: they kept our ideals high; they were concrete proof of our good will in God's service; they bolstered our flagging spir-itual forces. As long as we exercised care in formulating and inditing resolutions during our retreat, we were also 157 CLARENCE MCAULIFI~E faithful to our particular examen and observant of a cred-itable practice of silence. If we ever relaxed our diligence in making resolutions during retreat, our particular exa-men becamea half-hearted or neglected undertaking and our love for silence grew notably remiss. No Excuse t:or Neglect W.hy should the task, for task it is, of taking retreat resolutions ever be neglected by. us? What truly solid rea-son can we give for not writing them down and keeping them close at hand? Every man or woman engaged in a profession or business or in any other activity of moment pauses now and then to determine hn altered course of ac-tion. Small defects ard bound to seep in unnoticed, but they impede success and must b~ removed. Positive prog-ress also must be made; knowledge must be extended; greater zest must be engendered or the business will grow languid and die. Merchants do not hesitate to pay ample fees to public accountants and efficiency experts. These men detect pecuniary losses and open up new fields of ac-tivity for the merchant, and he makes definite plans accord-ing to their advice. Are we religious not engaged in a pro-fession, and a profession transcending all others? Can we deny that peccadilloes of one kind or another are, almost unobserved, weakening the fabric of our spiritual gar-ments? .that we are yet far distant from the glorious hori-zon of perfec~tion to which God beckons each one of us? Should we hesitate during our annual retreat to be our own public accountants and efficiency experts because of the unreasonable murmurings of our natural selves? A Faoorable Time for Resolutions Certainly no time is better suited for determining new spiritual policies than the annual retreat. During it we are segregated from our active duties; we engage in several days RETREAT RESOLUTIONS of silent communing with God; we see again what we al-ways know, but never reduce to perfect practice, that we are made only to serve Him; our spiritual ideals, dimmed by a whole year's mis~, are refurbished; God himself speaks to us and we hear His whisperings periodically, during each day of retreat pleading with us: "Why not give up this sin-less, but inordinate attachment for my sake? Why not de-vote more attention to developing this virtue?" Further-more, our subjective condition is fit for taking sage resolu-tions. We are calm, tranquil; excessive nervous tension, emotional ebullitions, the agitation engendered by custom-ary daily contact with other human personalities m all these vanish in the solitude of retreat. Those New Year resolutions so widely publicized by the newspapers can scarcely ever be successful if brought to bear upon spiritual matters, because the hectic round of daily duties and dis-tractions impedes clear vision and sound judgment. But the retreat is the New Year for religious and it is certainly to our shame if we pass up this one propitious occasion for taking efficacious resolves. Retreat resolutions are apt to be successful for another reason. Our profession is spiritual and its successful prac-tice does not depend on mere human endeavors. God called us to the religious life; He keeps us in it'; .He enables us every day to live it. Any resolution we take is doomed to failure if we count upon our own natural energies to fulfill it. Even the simplest, such as thedetermination to prepare Our meditation more carefully, to make an additional visit to the Blessed Sacrament, to relinquish some convenient, but unnecessary article, cannot be accomplished without the grace of God. Consider what vast stores of grace we must obtain in time of retreat. Not only do we perform our ordinary spiritual exercises, but the whole time is one continual prayer. A veritable mountain of sanctifying. 159~ CLARENCE MCAULIFFE grace is accumulated and with it the right to actual graces to be given us in the future as we need them. We shall need them particularly in order to be faithful to our reso- ¯Iutions, the fruit of our retreat, and they will be supplied generously and persistently by God, success depending solely upon our wholehearted cooperation. Negative Resolutions Why, then, we may ask have our resolutions so often been failures?' Why is it that we can hardly recall them after a few weeks perhaps? Have we been grossly negli-gent in corresponding with the grace of God? Not neces-sarily so. Perhaps our resolutions were not prudently made. God constructed the human being according to very definite laws. If we take resolutions contrary to these laws, especially our psychological laws, we can scarcely expect God to work a miracle to enable us to keep them. For in-stance, most' of us are probably too negative in drawing.up our resolutions. We will not do this; we will not do that; we will quit doing this, and so on. In other words, we pay entirely too much attention to our faults. If we are com-mitting deliberate sins, we must, of course, make them the first object of our determinations. But 'such is not usually the case. We fret over our imperfections or merely semi-deliberate faults, forgetting a sound teaching of theology which declares that it is impossible for any person without a special privilege, rarely granted, to keep from these even for a single day. The chances are that such defects spring from temperament, nervous disposition, unstable health or some other natural cause, partially, at least, beyond our control. Now it is a psychological law that negatives de-press the human soul. If our retreat resolutions comprise merely a lengthy list of "Don'ts" over inconsequential matters, we are .quite surely going to let them lapse. The 160 RETREAT RESOLUTIONS human soul is too lofty in its aspirations to be fettered' by a chorus of petty "I will not's"; it soars to the highest heavens in search of God Himself; unending vistai of per-fection lie stretched out before it and microscopic imper-fections are no obstacle to exalted sanctity even if they stay with us to our dying day. How much wiser it would be to 'resolve: "I will pay an additional visit to the Blessed Sac-rament each day this coming year for a few minutes out of love for my Savior," than to promise: "I will never sit down during meditation in the chapel", when, as a matter of fact, constant kneeling may so distract us that we cannot pray at all from bodily uneasiness. Besides, protracted kneeling may even do us positive corporal harm unless our backs and nerves are of rugged texture. How Man~/ Resolutions? Another mistake to which we may easily succumb is that of taking too many resolutions. It is true that a hun-dred resolutions would be none too many when we see in retreat the intricate labyrinth of perfection. Even so, it would certainly be unwise to take more than four. or, at most, five. Here again asimple law of. human psychology enters into play. We are so constructed that a multiplicity of resolves overbalances US~ dissipates our energies and re-sults in no accomplishment whatever. We cannot expect our Savior to rescind that law in our case by a miracle. It is well for us to recall that old axiom of spiritual au-thors that to advance in one virtue is to advance in them all. Progress, for instance, in the spirit and practice of obedi-ence necessarily reflects progress in the love of God. But love is the pith and core of all sanctity; loreis the all-em-bracing virtue; it means a closer alliance with God, more intimate union with Him; if it makes the tree of obedience more verdant, it must necessarily transmit its vigor to the 161 CLARENCE MCAULIFFE entire forest of virtues. Bearing this in mind, we should in retreat pay heed, firit of all to our vows. An outpost to one of them may have been weakened during the previous year. Then we should look to the virtues animating the vows and make a few positive resolutions that will stimu-late their growth. We must never forget that a religious observant of the vows is a good religious. Focusing our attention upon them, we keep our resolutions down to a minimum. Yet we will make more rapid spiritual s~rides .than we would if we squandered our resources by making decisions on the whole gamut of faults and virtues. The Search After Causes Our resolutions may result in failure for another rea-son also. They may be too vague, too imprecise, too gen-eral. For example, how often have we resolved in retreat to be more fervent in our spiritual exercises! No one could condemn a determination to better these exercises of piety. It is they especiall.y that keep our spiritual lives vigorous and bolster our flagging virtue. But what happened to that resolution to make them more devotedly? For a day or two, for a week or two perhaps, we were more attentive .to them and then, behold, we soon found ourselves in the same old rut of routine and mechanical performance. Why? Simply because our resolution violated a metaphysical law which states that to attain a purpose it is necessary to .~elect means, causes, that will conduce to its realization. If we resolve only upon the end to be achieved, we shall accomplish nothing. Every day we dream ofthings we should like to do, but we neglect the specific means to the end and our resolves are thus mere fancies relegated to the vast mound of inefficacious desires. If we really wish to improve our meditation, examinations of conscience and other spiritual exercises, let us investigate the reason 162 RETREAT RESOLUTIONS why they are performed so perfunctorily. Ii it because we indulge in considerable unnecessary talking? This will certainly dissipate the mind and react upon our spiritual exercises. If we make a determination to practise silence, we shall find that contact with God will become much eas.ier and our meditations will improve. Is it due to un-regu. lated affections of the heart? Then a resolution must be taken to watch carefully over such ungoverned move-ments by removing their occasions as far as possible. Is it due to stark physical fatigue? Then we can do nothing directly, but perhaps we can adopt some regime that will improve our health. Is it due to some other cause? Then let us examine for that cause and decide to overcome it if possible. Definite resolutions of these kinds will inject new life into our meditation whereas a mere hazy resolve to perform it better will soon vanish. This point is of the utmost consequence. Take another example. Most of us are guilty of positive faults against charity and all of us could practise this virtue much more perfectly. Shall we then determine during retreat: "I shall be more charitable"? Such a resolution is praiseworthy,, as a sign of our good will in God's service, but it is bound to lapse just as is the vague determination to do better in our spiritual exercises. If we wish to be more charitable, we must pry into the reasons why we are not more charitable. If we wish to obtain an effect, we must find a proportion-ate cause to produce it. Do we fail in charity because we associate only with those whose temperaments .are con-genial? because we areof a squeamish disposition and allow tiny impolitenesses to jar our nerves? because we indulge in idle ,gossip and small talk? because we have a biting or ridiculing tongue? Could we add blossoms to our charity by interesting ourselves in the activities of others? by de-veloping the spirit of a good listener? by watching for 163 CLARENCE MCAULIFFE opportunities to say a kindly word or express Our sym-pathy? Ways and means to add lustre to this virtue are truly endless. If one defect, in particular, makes us un-charitable, let us in retreat decide to banish it; if some precise means of burnishing our charity occurs to us, let us determine to adopt it. Then we shall find that Christ's own spirit of charity will take root and flourish in our souls. The Bizarre Resolution Fantastic and complex resolutions should also be avoided. Though we never relax our aim at the highest possible perfection, we always keep our feet anchored to earth by the bonds of prudence and common sense. The human mind can only think of one thing at a time; the will can be directed toward only one conscious goal at a time. Both faculties are bound to be smothered by kaleido-scopic resolutions. Suppose a religious were to emerge from retreat armed with this single resolve: From eight o'clock in the morning when her active day began until ten at night when she retired, exactly fourteen hours inter-vened, the same number of hours as there are stations of the cross. During the coming year she would divide the day according to the stations. From eight to nine in the morning she would live in the spirit of the first station, the condemnation of the Savior. From nine to ten her thoughts would Be engrossed with the second station, and so on throughout the day. It is not likely that this well-inten-tioned religious would keep that resolution. It is too bizarre and too involved .and would require constant at-tention from morning to night every single day. Human nature could not stand such a strain without well-nigh miraculous support. 164 RETREAT RESOLUTIONS Keeping the Resolution Once our resolutions are taken and written down, how can we perpetuate them for three hundred and sixty-five days? By adopting them as subjects for Our particular ex-amination of conscience. How often we puzzle over a suitable subject for this examen! The problem vanishes if we have our retreat resolutions on hand. Even though these be only three or four,, they will provide ample matter for the examen. Each resolution can be the subject for a few weeks or a month. Thereafter each resolution can be repeated again and, if this becomes wearisome, variety may be introduced without changing the subject matter. FOr instanc.e, if one of our retreat resolutions is to eliminate unnecessary talking, we can practise this for some days under the patronage of the Blessed Virgin and in imitation .of her silence in the home at Nazareth. Later on, we might exercise it in union with Christ in the desert and in His infancy and in His secluded hours of prayer upon the mountain. At another time we may practise it by repeated ejaculatory prayers to some favorite saint whose help we implore. In this way the subject will not grow tedious and it will never lose its value Since it is one of our rdreat resolutions. These may also be kept alive and vibrant by referring to them duriag the monthly recollection. Why devote this period to any other consideration when God has shown us in our previous retreat what actions of ours will most please Him? Despite our best efforts, however, we shall make un-successful resolutions. In framing them we may continue to violate the laws of human psychology. We may not observe them even for a week though we honestly wanted to do so. We should not be discouraged. God values our good will; and our retreat resolutions, if written down, are 165 CLARENCE MCAULIFFE palpable proof of this" good will. The resolutions of our novitiate days were often ill-formed and impossible of achievement, but they secured God's blessing for us. We kept the vows though we did not as yet have them; rarely did we commit even a deliberate venial sin; we strove by our clumsy retreat resolutions to improve our religious lives. These resolutions won from Christ the gift of fer-vor. He Will reanimate and increase that fervor if we per-severe in taking and recording resolutions during our re-treat. BOOKS RECEIVED (7"0 be reviewed later.) I PRAY THE MASS~. By Hugo H. Hoever, S. O: Cist. Catholic Book Publishing Company. New York. MARCH INTO TOMORROW. By, 3ohn ,J. Considine, M.M. Field Afar,Pres~. New York. ~, . WATCH AND PRAY. By ,John Moffatt, S.~J. The Bruce Publishing' Company. Milwaukee. IN THE SHADOW OF OUR LADY OF THE CiENACLE. By Helen M. Lynch; R.C. The Paulist Press. New York. SOME PAMPHLETS Cheer Up!; Be of Good Heart!; Have ConfidenCe!; Take Courage! These four pamphlets are by Father Bruno Hagspiel, S.V.D. They consist of a varied collection of Scripture texts, anecdotes, poems, and so forth, all designed to cheer the downhearted.~ Price, 10 cents a copy. May be obtained from The Mission Press, Techny, I11. Also, four pamphlets listed under the general title, GOSPEL MOVIES, that treat of Grace; Faith; Sin; Wed in Christ. They contain brief stories based on the Gospels and illustrating these various topics. All are written by Father Placldus Kempf, O.S.B. Price, 10 cents a copy. May be obtained from THE GRAIL, St. Meinrad~, Indiana. 166 Reparation in t:he Devotion t:o !:he Sacred I-leart: Malachi 3. Donnelly, S.J. THE "great apparition" of our Lo~d to St. Margaret Mary took place duiing the Octave of Corpus Christi, most probably in 1675. Showing her His Heart, our Lo~d said: "Behold this Heart which has so loved men, which has spared nothing, even to being exhausted and consumed, in order to testify to them its love. And the greater number of them make me no other return than ingratitude, by their coldness and their forgetfulness of me in this Sacrament of love. But what is still more painful to me is, that it is hearts who are consecrated to me who use me thus." And our Lord continued: "It is because of this that I ask you to have the first Friday after the Octave of Corpus Christi kept as a special feast in honor of my Heart. by receiving Communion on that day and making it a reparation of honor for all the insults offered to my Heart during the time that it has been exposed on the altars." The end of the devotion to the Sacred Heart, as revealed to St. Margaret Mary and as approved by the Church, is reparation to this same Heart for the coldness and indif-ference, for the sins and insults suffered by the Sacred Heart, especially in the Sacrament of His love. Reparation, in general, means the making up for an injury or offense committed against one to whom honor and love are due. In the case of reparation to the Sacred Heart, this presup-poses a real personal wound in that Heart caused by the sins of men, and a real ability on the part of those devoted to the Sacred Heart to repair this wound. This confronts us with two difficulties: 1) how can the Heart of Jesus now suffer? 2) how can we repair His sufferings? 167 MALACHI ,J. DONNI~LLY The soul of Jesus Christ.in heaven experiences no sor-row, nor does His glorified body know aught of pain. His perfect happiness can be dimmed by absolutely nothing: nay! not even by the most heinous sins of ungrateful men, How, then, could He complain of the coldness and indif-ference of m~n, and that in words which, seemingly indicate that each sin of the present day is a direct and piercing wound in His Sacred Heart? In a word, the solution lies in an Understanding of the knowledge that Christ, as Man, enjoyed during His, life on earth. Our Blessed Lord was both God and Man. As Man He enjoyed the beatific Vision throughout His whole life. Now, through this vision He received the complete perfection of His intellect. He knew all things that per-tained to His office, His dominion, His mission on earth, all that pertained to the plan of redemption. The knowledge that Christ had, as Man~ was like unto the eternal knowledge of God. During His whole lithe, .especially during the Passion, Christ',' as Man, had knowl-edge of future things; the good and bad 'actions of all men were directly1 present to His mind. Just as a giant search-light in one blazing stream of light covers at once a half-mile area and every inch of space therein, or just as the human eye gazing on a distant landscape sees the whole and each detail at the same time, so, too, did Christ see through the whole of time to come and all the actions of men con-tained therein. He saw all future events as actually present before His eyes and each event was the direct object of His vision. In order to understand better the relationship between the knowledge of Christ and reparation in the devo-tion to the Sacred Heart, let us go in imagination with Jesus to the garden of Gethsemani. As Jesus kneels in 168 REPARATION TO THE SACRED HEART meditation, He begins to grow sad. Why? This sadness can only be caused by the vision in His human mind. As He kneels there, the sins of all men Unfold before His eyes; all the ingratitude of men--especially, of those from whom He might well have expected better things--is directly present to His clear vision. Not a.single sin --- even an ever so secret sin of desire-~elu~les His all-seeing gaze. Also (and this is the consoling aspect of Gethsemani), every single act of reparation of those especially devoted to His Sacred Heart was present to Him. And, as Jesus looked upon these acts of reparation, His loving Heart felt real and deep consolation. When, therefore, at the present time we perform acts of reparation, it is perfectly true to say that there is direct contact between our act of reparation and the Heart of Christ in Gethsemani. Time and space are wiped out. His knowledge bridges nineteen hundred years as readily as we look across a river. We are present before His eyes: our acts of reparation console Him, our sins cause Him sorrow-ful agony. What should be the effect of this truth that all our actions were actuatl~t present to the suffering Christ in His Passion? A deep realization of this can only ground more firmly our love for the Sacred Heart and spur us to more ardent acts of loving reparation to the Sacred Heart. Just as the spokes of a wheel lead to the hub, with which they are in direct contact, so likewise do all the reparatory actions of men the world over lead back to Christ in the Garden; establish immediate contact with His Suffering heart. And the deep realization of this solidly established truth should arouse the deepest aspirations of our hearts and wills to do our utmost to console the great and loving Heart of Jesus. 169 The Pivol:al Point: ot: l=fl:ec!:ive ,ood Will G. Augustine.Ellard, S.J. ['Because of the importance of Father Ellard's theme, and because of the length of the article, we thought that the followihg summary might be appreciated by those who wish some handy way of visualiz!ng and recalling the points devdopedin the article. The Roman numerals refer to the same divisions of the text.--ED.] Summary I. The problem of bringing about moral good will is illustrated by three cases: a)" Good~ but weak, will in oneself; b) Generous, but inconstant, will in oneself; c) Irresponsive or bad will in others. II. What is meant by the expression: "the pivotal point of good will"? III. Things which do not constitute it. IV. It does consist in the realistic appreciation of values. These terms defined. V. Reasons for the assertion: a) Common sense; e) Philosophy; b) ExperienCe; f) Sacred Scripture; c) Observation; g) Theology. d) Experimental psychology: gI. The characteristics of the knowledge that is d~]namic, i.e. apt to move or strengthen the will: a) Presentation of the right aspect; e) Actuality: b) Sufficient" quantity ; f) Novelty ; c) Personal reference: g) Affinity and sympathy. d) Immediacy and imagery; VII. Practical conclusions-- 1. To move or strengthen the will for the present: Realize the values of motives: a) Learning what the pertinent values are; Means: b) Serious reflection and prayer, especially mental: c) Organization of the motives. 2. To steady the will in the future: Have the realization in the focus of consciousness at critical moments. a) Recollection; c) Habituation: Means: b) Association; d) Experience. 170 PIVOTAL POINT OF GOOD WILL SISTER Mary Frail is making her annual retreat. More clearly than she has been wont, she sees the magnifi-cence and beauty of the divine plan for herself, she is delighted with it, and she feels that it would the grand-est thing possible to carry it out in all its fulness. Also she notices that to do so would mean giving up certain rather dear little habitual imperfections. She is torn between two conflicting attracti6ns. Though she is free, and by all means would be pleased to embrace .the whole of the divine plan for her, especially since it is all for her own happiness, still she finds that her will does not respond as she would like. Making his retreat also is Father Inconstant. He finds no great difficulty in resolving upon the noblest courses, but in looking back over many retreats, many excellent resolutions, and many performances not so excellent, be feels rather distressed at the sight of his inconstancy. This time, if possible, he is going to make the new beginning that will stick. Just how--well, that is not too clear to him. Brother Zealous faces a different kind of difficulty. He is a teacher, and he is glad to do everything he can to make good Christians out of his charges. But often enough he finds that his pupils are irresponsive or wilful. Is there anything we can do for Sister Mary Frail, Father Inconstant, and Brother Zealous? Their problems concern wills, their own and those of their charges. Pos-sibly, some consideration of that upon which moral good will turns in a peculiar way, may be of service to them. II. By "the pivotal point of good will" let us under-stand a certain something that precedes good will itself and that, more than anything else, is a condition of its coming into being. Of course it does not determine the will; for man, being free, makes his own determinations, But even the free will is dependent upon previous conditions, and it 171 -G. A. ELLARD is the principal of these that we propose to consider. Ill. This pivotal point of good will cannot be simply knowledge. Hardly anyone would maintain nowadays the old doctrine attributed to Socrates that knowledge makes virtue. It is not freedom of the will; everybody knows by sad experience that he cannot make himself good by a mere fiat of his will, nor even by many of them. Imposition of good habits from without, though continued over a period ,of years, in the discipline, for example, of a boarding school,, may ultimately produce, not what is sought, but a reaction in the contrary direction. Good habits developed freely and from within cannot be the point we are inquir-ing after, primarily because they presuppose much good volition and action, .and the pivotal point is antecedent to these. Nor, to pass to the supernatural order, is grace as such the pivot. Grace could not help to explain natural good will:. Even in supernatural activity, it is not sanctify-ing grace, which of itself is not operative, but a habit in the order of b.elng, not of action. Nor can it be the infused virtues or the gifts-of the Holy Spirit; neither are these of themselves operative; to go into action, they need stimula-tion. In what sense actual grace may fulfill the function we are investigating, will be taken up later on. Prayer, that is, asking God for good will, cannot bethe pivotal point. If the request be granted, the question would remain by what means the good will is brought about. Realistic Appreciation of Values IV. The pivotal point does seem to be found in a realistic, sense or appreciation of values. Let us consider. Everything that is good has value, and therefore value here is understood to be any good. Good is, according to the classical division: the.pleasant, the useful, the proper. Val-ues may be high or low, and positive, like pleasure, or nega- 172 PIVOTAL POINT OF (~00D ~'ILL tive, like pain. Appreciation is the subjective or'personal response to the objective goods that we call values. To appi~eciate is, according to the dictionary, "to set a just value on; to esteem to the full worth of; to be fully sensi-ble of; to exercise a niceperception of worth." Good busi-ness people, like SisterMary Buyer, who has been chosen out.of many to make the purchases for the convent or hos-pital, presumably know how to discern values and prices, In art or literature a man is said to have appreciation if he recognizes or prizes what is beautiful. In general, a person has appreciation if he knows a good thing when he sees it. The wise man has been defined as he who knows true val-ues. Religious who properly evaluate the excellence of God and of His plan have appreciation. Realistic apprecia-tion equals .the reality, or at least approximates the reality, of the value. Appreciation, or evaluation, knowing good things as good, seems to be the vital link between the two spiritual facultieS. It involves knowledge of a certain kind, and thus it is intellectual; since complacency or some other indelib-erate movement of.will must follow the perception of. good or evil, it brings in the will also. In practise, the cultivation of appreciation of true or major values ri~quires the har-monious cooperation of both faculties. V. Among the reasons for placing the pivotal point of good will in a realistic sense or appraisal of values, we may notice the following. Common sense would seem to indicate that it is mo-tives that move the will. But what are motives, directly or indirectly, except values? If athing be of no value to one, why should one bother about it? Our own experience seems to teach the, same. If we consider carefully the best moments and the worst mo-ments in our past lives, and allow for all influences; internal- 173 G, A. ELLARD and external, can we give a better reason for our own inte-rior strength or weakness at such times than that just then our sense of values, our perception of what was really good, ~was most adequate and realistic or least so? A little observation of men shows how eagerly they react to what they value highly; to money, for example, or pleasure, or power, or honor. Salesmen and advertisers achieve their, purpose by inducing people to conceive, the highest possible idea of the worth of their merchandise. Everybody notices how much clerks will put up with from prospective buyers. Would the same persons be so com-plaisant if there were no immediate .gain in view? If it be necessary to, hold his job a man may rather easily bear with the caprices of his employer, ~though at home; with his wife and children, he acts like an 01d bear. Wars, in spite of all their evils, are fought for great economic or. political values. Suppose that, in the iight of experience and observa: tion of men, we. consider this hypothetical case. Let A be anybody who has great sums of money at his disposal. Let B be anybddy else. Let A ask B to do anything that is within the limits of reason. If A0 offer greater and greater amounts of money to B indefinitely, is it likely that B w~ill resist the attraction? Is it not to be expected thathe will yield~ and moreover like it? But money .is only the measure of .material values. That volition is a function Of appreciation or evalua-tion is also a finding of experimental psychology. This is the main practical contention in the works on the w.ill of the distinguished German ~lesuit psychologist, Lindwor-sky1. He specialized in0 the psychology~of~this faculty, and it is to him that I am mostly in~tebted for the ideas in this 1See especially The Training of the ~rill, translated by Steiner and Fitzpatrick (Brute. Mil~.'aukee) ; and The Ps~Icholog~t of Asceticism, translated by Heiring (Edwards: Eondotl). ~ " 174 PIVOTAL POINT OF GOOD WILL paper. According to Lindworsky, experiments show that volition depends chiefly upon insight into values, without of course being determined by them. The will can embrace whatever appears to it to be of value, and it can become very strong if one feels sufficiently that the value is great enough. To move the will, values must be subjectively. experienced. Keeping a resolution is dependent, not so much upon the energy with which it was made, nor upon an inner general strength of will developed by particular exercises, as upon sufficient initial evaluation and especially upon the presence of it in the focus of consciousness at critical moments. "That the secret of influencing the will lies principally in this, to present the ~right motives at the right time, is no new discovery; . it was always the doctrine of the tradi-tional Scholastic psy, chology": so writes Hertling2, a con-temporary authority in ascetical theology. From modern American psychologists: "Forcing oneself to an early rising, and compelling oneself to run six times around the barn before breakfast, or to do some other useless and diffi-cult thing daily, will not bring the result sought for . Will training implies bringing sufficient motivation into play.''8 Philosophy teaches that the object of the will is good that is known. There are two elements expressed in the object and a third is implied. The first is goodness, real or apparent. Hence no one can expect to influence the will except by proposing some good to it. To do anything else would be like trying to make one see what has no color or to hear something that is not sounding. Knowledge is the second requisite, and it is just as necessary. If one had an opportunity to pick up a million dollars, but did not ~Hertling: Lehrbuch der Aszetlschen Theologie (Rauch, Innsbruck), p. 177. 8Goult and Howard: Outline of General Ps~lcholog~l, pp. 338-339. 175 G. A. ELLARD notice it, nothing would come of it. Thirdly, the good whichis presented and known, must be apprehended not merely as true or in any other way, but as good. Where there is no good or no perception of it, there can be no voli-tion. If the good be sufficiently great and seen with suf-ficient clarity, there can be no resistance to its-attraction, as happens with the Infinite Goodness and Beauty in the beatific vision. Hence, in general, the greater the good and .the clearer one's knowledge of it, the more likely the will's acceptance of it, and the more energetic and constant that acceptance will be: Sacred Scripture seeks to move men mostly by prom-ising good things and threatening evil things. But these are values, positive or negative. Christ Himself appears to have indicated what the will follows in such texts as these: "For where thy treasure is, there shall thy heart be also" (Matthew 6: 21). "For what shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world, and lose his soul? Or what shall a man give asaprice for his soul?" (Matthew 16: 26). "The kingdom of the heavens is like unto a treasure hid in the field, which a man findeth and covereth; and in his j6y he goeth and selleth.all that he hath and buyeth that field. Again, the .kingdom of the hea~'ens is like unto a merchant in search of. goodly pearls; and when he .hath found one pearl of great price, he goeth and selleth all that he hath and buyeth it" (Matthew 13: 44-46). A theological consideration: interior actual grace helps us to do good or avoid evil by enlightening the mind and inspiring the will. Psychologically Speaking, one would say that grace moves the will by enlightening the mind. The indeliberate inclination excited in the will corresponds to the ideas aroused in the intelligence. Light relative to a practical step can conceivably bear upon any or all of these three points: what is to be done, why it is to be done, and 176 PIVOTAL POINT OF GOOD '~rILL bow it is to be done. The firstalone would be quite insuf-ficient, and might well be deterrent, as when an unpleasant duty is indicated. To show why a thing is to be done: what is this but to manifest its motives or values, to reveal that it is becoming, profitable, necessary, and so on? In this way, by giving one a subjective appreciation, actual grace enters into the pivotal point of supernatural good will. It tends to correct that perversity which the prophet Isaias denounces: "Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for dark-ness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter" (Isaias 5: 20). It gives one something of that gift of the Messias: "that he may know to refuse the evil, and to choose the good" (Isaias 7:. 15). In modern terms, it enables one to share in Christ's sense of value. The Church has incorporated into the Breviary4 a famous passage of St. Augustine in which he comments on the text: "No one can come to me, except the Father . draw him" (John 6: 44), and uses a quotation from Ver-gil: "If the poet could say, 'Each one's pleasure draws him,'5 not necessity but pleasure, not obligation, but delight, how much more strongly ought we to say that the man is drawn to Christ who is delighted with truth, delighted With beatitude, delighted with justice, delighted with everlasting life, all of which Christ is? . You show a green branch to a sheep and you draw it. Sweets are shown to a child, and he is drawn. Because he runs, he is drawn; he is drawn byloving; without injury to body he is drawn; with bonds of the heart he is drawn. If. earthly delights and pleasures revealed to lovers draw them; does not Christ, revealed by the Father, draw us? For what does the soul desire more strongly than the truth?''° 4Ember Wednesday after Pentecost; Lessons 7-9. 5Eclogues, II, 65. OTractatus 26 in doannem. 177 G. A. ELLARD It may be objected that we know enough or too much already. What we need is not more knowledge, but more willing. Sometimes that is true. But at other times, it may be asked; have we the right kind of knowledge, and enough of that kind? In ~any case, if a man cannot directly make a decision that he would like to make, what do you advise him to try? Have you anything better than that he should reconsider his motivation? Dynamic Knowledge VI. Now let us see if we can discern what kind of knowledge of ~;alues it is that, as it were, magnetizes the will. It is a certain, dynamic knowledge, found to be char-acterized more or less by the following attributes. First, it will present things under the right aspect, that is, it will propose things, not as true--the usual function of knowledge--but as good or evil, lovely or odious, beau-tiful or hideous, and so on. Such are the phases of things that it will bring out into relief. A quotation from the psychologist James will illus-trate what is meant by the right aspect. Consider "the case of an habitual drunkard under temptation. He has made a resolve to reform, but he is now solicited again by the bottle. His moral triumph orfailure lil~erally consists in his finding the right name for the case. If he says that it is a case of not wasting good liquor already poured out, or a case of not being churlish and unsociable when in the midst of friends, or a case of learning something at last about a brand of whiskey he never met before, or a case of celebrating a public holiday, or a case .of stimulating him-self to a more energetic resolve in favor of abstinence than any he has ever yet made, then he is lost. His choice of the wrong name seals his doom. But if, in spite of all the plausible good names with which his thirsty fancy so copi- 178 PIVOTAL POINT OF GOOD WILL ously furnishes him, he unwaveringly clings to the truer bad name and apperceives the case as that of 'being a drunk-ard, being a drunkard, being a drunkard,' his feet are planted on the road to salvation. He saves himself by thinking rightly.''7 The right aspect is not enough. There must also be a certain quantitg in the knowledge. It must be sufficiently clear, evident, rich, and full. In fact, the closer it approaches equality to the reality, the better. This is a particularly important dement in the realism of dynamic appreciation. Hence, obscure, vague, or hazy conceptions of the most tremendous realities may remain inert and sterile. Moreover, personal rfference is vitally necessary. To see that a thing matters to another may leave me unaffected. I must see the vital importance of it for my own dear self. In the last analysis evaluations must be based on one's past experiences of pleasure, pain, or love. Through these gen-uine experiences present knowledge must be vitalized. A man, for example, who does not remember vividly how it feels to have his finger burned, is in no position to begin to imagine how it would feel to be consumed with raging fires in the infernal regions. If one should never have experi-enced the thrill of unselfish love, one could hardly under-stand God's absolute loveliness and make an act of divine charity. Nor could a man who ha~ never been aroused by created beauty react to the Uncreated Beauty. Personal reference is necessary in another sense also. Great things have many values or suggest many motives, some of them apt to appeal to one and others t6 another. Each one must discover those that evoke interest and response in himself and exploit them. One soul may love God as a father, another as a friend, and a third as a spouse. 7James: Talks to Teachers, pp. 187-188. 179 (3. A. ELLARD Two more marks of dynamic recognition of worth are iramediac~t and iraaqer~. Direct perception of an object is much more apt to stir one than knowledge that is only mediate, discursive, or abstract, because it is closer to the object and more like it. Hence .the weakness, from an affective and effective point of vie.w, of reasoning and argu-ments. Love at sight, even to infatuation, is said to occur at times; but nothing like it is possible when men and women know each other only through description or cor-respondence. A dreadful catastrophe may horrify one who sees it but leave.a reader little affected. To make up for lack of immediate knowledge when it cannot be had, the imagination must be used. The more vivid and realtand rich the imagery, the better. The human mind is depend-ent on the senses and the imagination. Hence, to get at the emotions and, through them, the will, fill the imagination. "Empathy," the ability "to feel-oneself into situations," for example, into the Gospel scenes, or into the conse-quences of one's choices, into the pleasures or pains that may follow them, can compensate to some extent for the deficiencies of indirect knowledge. Happily most of the moral and spiritual values may be contemplated in the concrete in persons who have real-ized them. The scale would range from Christ, the Blessed Virgin, and the Saints down to the humblest person who has Something to be admired and imitated. Actuatit~I of knowledge gives it power. It is of deci-sive importance that the motives be actually before con-sciousness at the critical moments when they are moit needed and least likely to be there. It is not enough that they be stored away in the recesses of the memory. Actual consciousness, for instance, of the ~ttractions of unchaste pleasure may win the battle against merely habitual aware-ness of the reasons for keeping chaste. The force of occa- 180 PIVOTAL POINT OF GOOD 'q~rlLL sions of sin illustrates well the characteristics of dynamic knowledge that we have been reviewing; the impression they produce is thoroughly realistic. Nooeln.I is also an aid, as it makes a greater appeal to the sensibilities. Hence, ~o keep a good idea from losing its motive power, consider it from new angles and find new beauties in it. Since choice is always comparative, a preference of one thing to another, superiority! of knowledge of one alterna-tive gives it an added chance of being taken. A slight value well known may be preferred to a much greater one less well known. In general, .other things being equal, that alternative will be chosen the values of which are better known or predominant in the focus of consciousness at the time. FinaliSt, a factor of knowledge that induces prefer-ential appreciation is found in the subject himself, namely. a certain s~tmpath~t, based on a natural or supernatural affinity: the "connaturality" discussed by St. Thomas in the Summas. The classical example, from Aristotle on, is the chaste man's knowledge of chastity as opposed to the theoretical ethician's. With respect to the Supreme or Absolute Value, that is, to God, this affinity is founded principally upon the essential relations of the creature to the Creator and of sonship to the Divine Father. Such seems to be the kind of knowledge that leads to willing and to action. It does not make one learned, and may be greater in the ignorant peasant than in a scholar or theologian. But if its object be divine values, it will help to make one wise and holy. If we could make our knowledge and estimation of eternal values equal to our appraisal of temporal things, our probation would be over. We cannot, to cite an 88umraa Tbeologic~, 2a, 2ae, q. 45, a. 2. 181 G. A. ELLARD instance, have an experimental knowledge of God in this life, though the mystics do lay claim to just that or some-thing like it, and in the light of it they conceive for God a love like that fierce, overwhelming, personal love which arises between man and woman. On the other hand, and to our misfortune, the false or minor values of material things do solicit us through precisely that form of knowl-edge which is thoroughly realistic and dynamic. There-fore it is all the more imperative for us to be mindfully aware of the advantages that sensible attractions have over spiritual, values, and in oposition to do whatever we can to compensate for the difference. Practical Corollaries VII. Suppose we consider separately the cases in which ¯ one wishes to influence a will at the moment and in the future, or what is about the same thing, making a resolu-tion now and endeavoring to secure its observance in the future. 1. To move the will now, and to charge it with power, get l~y all available means the maximum possible appreciation of the values or motives that are pertinent, and diminish as much as possible any antagonistic evalua-tion. ¯ First, it is important rightly to discern just what ought to be done, that is, in our case, what the law of God is or what He prefers. Missing this point, through impru-dence or scrupulosity or laxity, is not conducive to good will. But then focus attention, feeling, and effort on the advantages, gains, and reasons for so acting. Not u~bat ought to be done is to be stressed, but the u;h~/'s. Imitate the clever salesman who sells his wares by persuading the potential buyer that it is really to his own interest and profit to buy. Exhortation had better take this form than a tedious repetition of "Let us'es" or "Let us not's." Put 182 PIVOTAL" POINT OF GOOD WILL the accent, not on the rights of authority, but on the advantages to the subject in obeying; these include the values of obedience itself. Even if you urge that it is God's will, try to explain whg He wills it, what values He has in mind. With most persons, begin with a stron.g appeal to self-interest; then proceed to the nobler interests, such as God's; Christ's, souls'. Very especially in case something difficult or distressing be involved, for example, self-- abnegation, or love of the Cross, the greater the disagree-able feature, the greater must be the emphasis on the good aspects and results. This is a simple psychological neces-sity. Some who exhort to abnegation would seem to think the greater the evil, the more it will be welcomed. Mere negatives--"Dont's"--are never inspiring, and therefore negative resolutions should somehow be given a positive character and value, for instance,-by substitution or sub-limation. To acquire a dynamic sense of moral values two chief means are available; first, to learn what those means are; and secondly, by serioi~s reflection and prayer, to take their measure or realize their magnitude. What the values are is to be learned by study and reading or listening to sermons and conferences. We could not attempt to outline them here. But it may be sug-gested that the perfect man Would strive to know and will .the same values that. God Himself wills and to have a simi-lar appreciation of them. They are the Infinite Goodness Itself and the excellences of the divine cosmic plan, cul-minating in divine beatitude for an,gels and men, with immunity from all evil, for eternity. Included in that plan would be the sublime grandeurs of the Incarnation and of its effects in time and eternity. Next in order is to work up an adequate appreciation of these motives, justly to appraise them, to recognize their 183 G. A. ELLARD ' full worth, to feel their force and significance. This is ~o be done principally by serious reflection and prayer, or better, by both together, that is, by mental prayer. This is the great means and hence the supreme importance and efficacy of it in the spiritual life. St. Thomas has a whole article in the Summa to demonstrate that "contemplation or meditation is the cause of devotion.''9 In it he quotes these words from St. Augustine: "the act of the will arises from understanding." Without mental prayer, or something approaching it, one cannot expect much grasp of moral values: such is human nature. The senses and the world overwhelm one with their values, which are in possession. as it were, from the beginning. A counterbalancing per-ception of the worth of things divine does not come with faith nor without effort. The germ of it.is there, but it must be developed. The human spirit is immersed in mat-ter, and if it is to raise itself above material attractions and maintain itself upon that superior level, it-must exert its forces with an energy comparable to that of the powerful motors of the big clippers or flying-fortresses. This means in the beginning hard thinking and much of it, with ener-getic and sustained will-activity corresponding to the light won. In mental prayer.a vitalized and dynamic insight is gained into divine truths and values, the will reacts and responds at once, the appropriate affections are elicited, the consequences of possible courses of action are carefully weighed and felt in anticipation, the correct moral atti-tudes are assumed, practical resolutions are made and their execution rehearsed, many fervent petitions are made, and grace, coming in ever increasing measure, deepens and enhances the whole process. In a word, one is filled with that light, good will, and strength which are needed to ful-fil one's part in God's magnificent plan. 9Summa Theologica, 2a, 2ae, q. 83, a. 3. 184 PIVOTAL POINT OF GOOD WILL If one cultivati~ m~ntal prayer well and sufficiently, he will also use all the other means to spiritual advancement and thus he will become perfect. If one be faithful in the lower degrees of mental prayer, he may be led on even to mystical contemplation, wherethe labor will be less, and the infused light, appreciation, and love may be incom-parably greater. Mostly in the intimate commerce of con-templation do the spouses of God come to their peculiar experience and all-absorbing love of Him. The funda-mental difference between a mere believer, a person of medi~ ocre virtue, and a saint, seems to be that, whereas they all assent to the same truths, the believer hardly does more, the mediocre person feels to some extent what they mean, and the saint truly realizes their significance. All the motives, general and particular, having been considered, they are to be assembled and associated together, so that one may recall the others, and then they are to be thrown into the scales against their false contraries, and proposed for acceptance to the will, with an inexorable "either. or!" 2. To aid in securing future execution of a resolution, four means in particular are effective: recollection, associa-tion, habituation, and experience. Recollection will tend tO prevent the light and warmth of one's vivid appreciation from vanishing into the dark-n~ ss. God and divine things are in themselves interesting, and if one's insight into them has been sufficient, interest in them will spontaneously spring up. Then without too much difficulty interest will direct attention; attention to divine values will keep them in the field of consciousness; and naturally the affections and will should follow. One should foresee as far as possible the occasions in which one's constancy will be put to the test, and deter-mine in advance by .what precise means one is going to 185 G. A. ELLARD react. "The modern psychology of will teaches that mere volition accomplishes nothing, unless a definite "way of behaving has been planned and practised.''1° Then the occa-sion, the resolution with its means, ~nd the motives, already organized among themselves, are to be associated together in thought as firmly as possible, so that when the occasion comes, it may recall into the focus of consciousness the reso-lution with its means, and this in turn the whole constella-tion of motives. Thus their cumulative force will be available, and successful action may be expected. To illustrate by'an example from Lindworsky: John notices that whenever he meets Charles on the way to work, he falls into uncharitable conversation. He adds to his gen-eral resolve not tofail against charity this means, that when he meets Charles again, he will promptly open a discussion of such or such a topic. Thus he links together all four: -the occasion, the r.esolution, the precise means, and the ¯ motives. 1~ All the procedures indicated in the preceding pages can be cultivated more and more until they become solid l~abits of virtue. Thus greater sureness, facility, and perfection in good are acquired. With every success in accomplishing what one desires, one actually feels and experiences to a certain extent the fruition of one's ideals and values, and thus one's appreciation of them becomes ever more realistic, and more like the divine or Christiike sense of what is of value. If with sufficient realism you. see that your treasure is ~n the Infinite Goodness of the Blessed Trinity and in the advantages of the divine plan, you will find your will there also. lOLindworsky: The P~cbolog~/ of Asceticism, p. 38. ~lbid.o p. 37. 186 Scruples Versus !:he Human Gerald Kelly~ S.3. THIS sketch concerns two characters, both of whom .are "| purely fictitious. Any resemblance to any person in real life.is a mere coincidence. One character is called Humanus, because he represents the ordinary conscientious human being, one who is.cheerfully content to be .~'like the rest of men," The other character is Scrupulosus, so-called because he typifies the victims of that gnawing and unfounded fear of sin known as scruples. ' For Scrupulosus, a supreme difficulty is to appreciate what may be called "the human way of acting." It is hard to.define this human way. It expresses itself in a quiet resignation to the fact that human problems cannot be solved with the exactness of mathematical problems. ~.It is an essential requisite for peace among men and for interior peace with God and oneself. Humanus takes this human way in full, easy stride. A reliable man tells him something; he believes it without struggle. True, the .man might be wrong, might be lying, using a mental reservation, or even deceiving himself. But Humanus does not tr6uble himself about these things, unless there is some reM evidence.to make him suspect them. When a man gives him money, Humanus does not bite it or ring it on a counter. He knows the possibility of counter-feit money; but he knows .too that social life demands that we practise a certain amount of trust in the good will of others. (Incidentally, the author once lived in a place where there must have been a great deal of. counterfeiting. Every time one paid for something in coins, a cautious clerk rang the coin on~the counter. It was most distressing.) . ¯ . Humanus follows the.same human way in his dealings with Go&and himself.God made him huma'n; God.ought GERALD KELLY to be content if he simply acts humanly. And he has enough troubles in life without suspecting himself unduly. Scrupulosus can follow the human way in his dealings with other men; but in those things which concern God and himself he is decidedly inhuman. He seems to thinl~ that, in dealing with God, he must have God's own unerring and penetrating vision of the human heart; that in dealing with himself none of the canons of human peace are applicable. Perhaps a few examples will make this clear. The Sacrament of Penance, truly a Sacrament of peace according .to our Lord's designs, affords no real peace to Scrupulosus. Definitely, it is a torture; a torture to go. a torture to stay away. And the reason for the torment, to put it simply, is that the reception of this Sacrament involves four elements---examination of conscience, con-fession, contrition, satisfaction--each of which can be fulfilled only :in a human way. Suppose we follow Humanus and Scrupulosus through an examination of conscience. Humanus says a few pre-liminary prayers, then looks into-his soul. This is riot a very strenuous process for him;in fact, it verges on sheer routine. Humanus is conscious of the fact that he could improve his method, but he also knows that he fulfills all the essentials. Mortal sins first; and it does not take him long to find :them. Heis no laxist. He knows a mortal sin when he sees one; but he. knows too that they are big enough to be seen with the naked eye. On some Com-mandments he does not even examine himself. Idolatry, murder, robbing banks--all such things are off his list. He would waste his time searching his soul for them. If he does find that he has sinned seriously, he notes the number of times; and if he cannot recall the number, he is content to add the saving word "about." If he is doubtful about the serious sinfulness of~anything--well--he is doubtful: 188 SCRUPLES VERSUS THE HUMAN '~AY There is no use wrestling with the doubt now; if he could not solve it before, he is less likely to solve it now. Venial sins? Humanus knows there were many little things, but it is often hard to cat~ilogue them. He selects two or three, and phrases them as best he can. Sometimes he numbers venial sins, sometimes he doesn't; and he" knows tha~ the number need not be confessed. Finally, Humanus makesan act Of contrition. In this, too, there is a trace of dry routine. Humanus has often resolved to "polish it up" a bit. Contrition never causes him worry; though it has at times puzzled him. However, he has solved the puzzle in the following manner. When a friend offends him and afterwards comes to him, holds out his hand and says he is sorry, Humanus takes the hand and forgives. He never looks to see if there are tears in the man's eyes. He does not stop before forgiving to ask: "Now, John, are you sure you're sorry? Can you swear you're sorry? Do you t:eel sorry? Maybe you're deceiving me, or yourself?" No, Humanus does none of these things; so he solved his puzzle about contrition by deciding that God doesn, t act that way, either. God is content with our just being human. Scrupulostis also examines his conscience! After lengthy preparatory prayers, he finally musters the courage to plunge into the .abysmal depths of his black soul. He goes after mortal sins with searchlight and microscope; and at the end of the search he is amazed that he hasn't found any. That cannot be right. There must be some; at least, there might be some some grim deed that his lax conscience is covering up. Further examination still fails to reveal a clear-cut mortal sin, but by this time he has managed to work up a doubt. Now, is he doubtful? He'd better con-. less it as certain, because if he only thinks he is doubtful and really is not doubtful he will be deceiving the priest. 189 GERALD KELLY As for venial sins, he must have scores of them. Missed morning prayers--distractions in the prayers he did say! He has been told that missing morning prayers is really no .sin, that there is no law of either God or man that says: You must pray in the morning. But be ought to pray in the morning. As for distractions, he has also been told that when involuntary they are not sins, and that even when voluntary they are merely small irreverences. But be ought not to get distracted; it is base ingratitude for him to neglect God in that manner. He'd better give the number of the distractions: 15--no, perhaps it was only 14. He cannot make up his mind, so he decides to say 15; in fact, he finally decides to give the whole background of the ghastly affair. And so on. It is time for him to go to confession. He is not ready, but he will try. Humanus makes his confession, returns to his pew and says his penance and a few prayers of devotion. The time passes very quietly. He leaves the church, full of peace and ready, as he has often.expressed it, "to be hit by a truck." In a general way, he knows that his .confession is not mechanically perfect. Sometimes be does not say things just as he had planned them; he becomes confused, dis-tracted, or even a bit embarrassed. Also--and he has this on the authority of adevout priest--he knows that the confessor may get distracted, or even nod a bit. But this percentage of error does not greatly concern Humanus. God Himself arranged that this Sacrament should be received and administered by human beings. The essentials are quite easy to fulfill; the accidentals allow both the priest and the penitent the opportunity to strive for greater perfectio.~l and increase in humility. It should: be evident from the story of his preparation that no great peace floods the soul of Scrupulosus as he emerges from the confessional. Nevertheless, he grits his 190 SCRUPI~S VERSUS THE HUMAN ~rAY teeth and kneels dowh to say his penance. Three .Hail Marys! He literally "tackles" the first one. But in the middle something goes wrong; he must have missed a word. He starts again, and then again; but he cannot satisfy himself that that Hail Mary is properly said. As he pauses'in desperation, the whole blurred story of the confession begins to unfold before his mind. Nothing was said right. The priest must have misunderstood him com-pletely. The fact that he got only three Hail Marys con-firms him in this fear; if the priest had understood him cor-rectly, he would have given him at least a Rosary. At this moment, a new source of interior torment opens up. Even if the confession had been good, the absolution could not be valid because he did not make a real: act of con-trition. He just went through some words. God must know that he was not really sorry. And his confessions have been that way for a long time; he'simply must make a gen-eral confession. He has made general confessions before without any subs.equent peace of soul, but this one will be different. We might take Holy Communion as another example of the difference between Humanus and Scrupulosus. It should be one of the supreme consolations of the Cath-olic's life. The essentials for its reception are very small: the state of grace, acquired by Sacramental absolution, if need be; and the keeping of.the fast from midnight. Humanus finds the fulfillment of these conditions simple enough. He is satisfied with normal, .human assur-ance that he is in the state of grace. If he doubts about a serious sin, he generally prefers to go to confession, but he knows he has no strict obligation to do so, and he is con-- tent on occasions merely to make an act of contrition and go to Communion. The fast presents him with no prob-lem at all. The law is a safeguard to the reverence due the 191 GERALD KELLY Blessed Sacrament. It forbids eating and drinking after midnight. Humanus knows what ordinary people look upon as eating and drinking, and he does not have to con-sult a chemist~ to find out just what is food. or a physiologist to discover precisely what is meant by eating. All these things are so many thorns for S~'rupulosus. How does he know he is in the state of grace? He can't prove it. He is not sure he can make an act of contrition, so he must always go to confession when in doubt. It may be that his confessor has assured him again and again that, in his present trial, he mayalways~go to Communion, no matter what his doubts, no matter how many sins he thinks he has committed. Even after this and though he knows that the Providence ofGod guides souls through superiors and confess.ors, yet his case is different, and the confessor does not really understand it. As for the fast, here is but one of Scrupulosus'.many hard experiences with it. He is on his way to Mass. His lips tickle. .He rubs his coat-sleeve over his mouth. A moment later he feels something strange in his mouth-- some lint from his coat, he thinks! He gathers all his salivary forces to remove it, but he is too late. He swallows. Well, that's the end. He has broken his fast, he may not go to Communion. This is his first conviction, but in church a gleam of saving common sense is still able to pierce the fog of fear and he does go to Holy Communion. Later the fear returns with a vengeance. He made a sacrilegious Communion. After that, one thing leads to another. He begins to notice a strange taste in his mouth every morning--the lint from the bedclothes! He tries again and again to remove it; but the consciousness of the lint remains, and with it the conviction that he may not receive Communion. There are two ways of solving this lint problem. One 192 SCRUPLES VERSUS THE HUMAN WAY way is to consult a trained theologic/n, wh~ might show Scrupulo~us by keen argumentation that lint is not food, or who might indicate that, even if. it were food, it was not taken "in the manner of food." This is a perfectly legiti-mate method of solving the problem, but hardly a satis-factory one for Scrupul0sus. It allows for too much quibbling, and, even when it does convince, its appeal is only to the intellect. Scrupulosug needs something that will impress his imagination and thus remove the emo-tional pressure of his fears. The second method is therefore a much better one for -Scrupulosus. It is a method suggested by an old and experienced diagnostician of his problem. It is very simple. "You take awoolly blanket, the woollier the bet-ter. Seize firmly in both hands, raise to the mouth with-out flinching, and bite hard. When you have a good bite, then you chew thoroughly and trot to swallow.'" This is a guaranteed cure. After one such experiment Scrupulosus needs no metaphysical discussion to be °con: vinced that human beings do not eat coats or blankets. In this matter, at least, he will be content with ?he human toad. No one-should gather from this brief sketch of Huma-nus and Scrupulosus that the latter does not wish to act as others do. His difficulty .is more subtle. Briefly put, it amounts to thi~: he cannot relax. 'He is like a sick man who fights an anesthetic; or, perhaps more accurately, he is like a man who will take the anesthetic, even if it kills him. So it is with Scrupulosus; at times he fights his fears, at other times he clenches his fists and says he will be human. Neither method will help him. He must relax under the pressure of his fear. This is not easy to do; yet it can be done if only one retains the power of laughing at oneself. For Scrupulosus, a sense of humor is more precious than the gift of tears. 193 Nint:s t:or Sacris!:ans Gerald Ellard, S.J. SACRISTANS for whom its cost or other considerations make Self-Lite Charcoal undesirable may readily secure the advantage of a large glowing surface with ordinary charcoal in the following way. After the unlighted charcoal ~has been placed in the censer, a little wood-alcohol is allowed to, drip on it and soak into it. It is then ignited, and, when the alcohol has burned away, the charcoal will be alight through and through and thus able, when fed with incense, to send up what is actually something like a pillar of smoke, a symbol of prayer visible to the entire congre-gation. The matter of securing the most suitable incense within the means of all is no small concern, and prompts one to mention a variety now being used with eminent satisfac-tion. Its cost is very low' but it is not on sale, as far as we know, in the church-goods houses. Trees of Syria exude a balm that is known in trade as. olibanum. This fragrant and gummy substance is widely used in varnish-making. It is graded in trade circles by the size of the lumps: egg (large) and tears (small). Tears of olibanum make an ideal incense.:~ Stocks available in this country may not.~ last much longer, but up to the present time wholesale drug dealers have had no difficulty in supplying it. The tears should not be powdered, as much of the fragrance would be lost, but burned as they come. In sacristies serving a large number of priests the prob-lem of quickly providing each priest with an alb of just the right length often proves formidable. A Chicago church 194 HINTS TO SACRISTANS where many Masses are the daily rule has at the edge of its alb-cabinet, at shoulder height, an unobtrusive measure indicating the number of inches from the floor. A priest has just to hold up an alb to the measure to see if it is the proper length for his use. It may no longer be news .to sacristans that candle~ burners in pyrex glass are now available in all candle sizes. In style they follow-not the older lamp-chimney shape, which "black out" tOO much of the candle flame and cause difficulties in lighting the candles, but the snug, dose-fitting sleeve pattern. The pyrex burners have all the advantages of the better type of metal burners, with the big additional one of beirig practically invisible. Sacristans shudder to see priests, in adjusting the man-iple, disregard the little tab provided for pinning, .and run the pin.into the precious fabric of the maniple itself. This is riot perverseness, but a measure of necess!ty (or rather, convenience), inasmuch as many of these little .tabs are too narrow to aliow one to run a pin crossways. Many new vestments now provide a shield-shape, or even semicircular, tab which affords ample room for pinning without being conspicuous. In repairing vestments sacristans might well provide such "pin-space." A strict law of the Church prescribes that the priest mix a "very small quantity;', of water with the wine to be consecrated at Mass. Most priests wish to take only a few drops of ,water; and sacristans can help them in this regard by filling the .water cruet almost to the top. When the cruet is pract.ica!ly full, it is easy to shake out a few drops. This is not so easy to do when the neck of the cruet is empty. 195 The Presumed Permission James E. Risk, S.J. THE philosophers tells us that what happens by chance happens rarely and cannot be foreseen. The Church, in her legislation, makes provision for many unusual situations that have arisen in the course of her past history, and may arise again. Hence she grants to all priests emer-gency faculties such as to absolve from censures, to assist at marriages and to perform other priestly functions. Fac-ulties of this kind are not granted to all priests save in cases of spirituhl emergency. Now, the most conscientious reli-gious, too, will find himself at times in an unforeseen situ-ation where permissions required by his vow of poverty or obedience are needed; where the delay necessarily in-volved in obtaining such permissions cannot be admitted. Unusual circumstances arisirig from the uncertainties of travel or health may, for example, produce a situation calling for the legitimate application of the principles gov-erning the presumed permission. Since actions based on presumed permissions should be the exceptioh in the normal life ofa religious, the older theologians took great care to limit their number to the minimum, lest a too liberal application of the-norms of presumption tend to obviate the necessity of asl~ing for many of the ordina~ry permissions. Sincere reflection and a normal exercise of foresight will lead a religious to limit the number of presumed permissions, while a ready ad-mission by superiors that unforeseen situations are, from time to time, inevitable, will prompt them to make allow-ances for the reasonable presumptions of their subjects. Though the question of presumed permissions is by no means limited to the field of religious poverty, it is chiefly from this angle that we shall endeavor to examine it. 196 THE ~RESUMED ~ERMISSION Various Kif~ds or: Permissions Progress in the exercise of religious poverty demands an accurate knowledge of the various kinds of permis-sions granted by superiors. By obtaining permission to acquire, dispose of, and use material things possessing some economic value such as books, money- and the like, the religious is faithful to the obligations freely accepted when he vowed poverty. He does not act in his own name nor as an independent proprietor, but as a poor man who has nothing that he can .truly call his own. Acting w~th-out permission in these matters, he violates his vow by committing what many moralists choose to call a "sin of proprietorship." They say that such a religious acts like a man who is bound by no vow of poverty and is independ-ent of any superior in the acquisition, use, or disposal of property. The commentators on the religious life usually speak of superiors as granting permissions; though in most communities there is generally appointed an assistant su-perior who is empowered to grant many of the ordinary permissions demanded by the obligations of the vow of poverty. Our purpose in examining the nature of the pre-sumed permission leads us to comment briefly on the other forms of permission employed by a religious in the observ-ance of his vow. This will serve to clear the ground for a more accurate understanding of the presumed permission. We spea~k of an express permission as one given by word of mouth or in writing, indicating unmistakably the mind of the superior. A tacit permission, as the very name implies, is p[udently considered as granted from the silence of the superior, who is aware of certain actions that are governed by poverty or obedience. The axiom "silence gives consent" may be reasonably applied when circum-stances are such that, if the superior objected, he would voice his disapproval. An implied permission is one that 197 JAMES E. R~sK is contained in another permission. The permission of a superior, for example, authorizing a /eligious to make a trip, implies the permission to use the funds necessary for traveling. A general permission may embrace many acts of the same or different species. In some religious commu-nities there prevails the practice of renewing each month general permissions in virtue of which a religious may ac-quire or dispose of objects of a very small economic value, such as articles of devotion and the like. The extent of such permission depends on-the constitutions, rules and customs Of the institute. A particular permission .is granted for an individual case. Such a permission, how-ever, if the superior so desired, might be extended not only to a singie occasion but to several occasions calling for the same permission. Thus, permission granted to an ailing religious to consult a specialist might be limited to a single visit or extended to several, according to the nature of the indisposition requiring attention. The Presumed Permission Authors who have treated of the obligations of the religious life agree that a religious is justified in presuming permission when, owing to some inconvenience in obtain-ing permission without delay, he prudently decides that if the superior in the present circumstances, were .asked for the same permission, he would readily grant it. Now be-fore proceeding further, let it be noted that there is one very substantial difference between the presumed permis-sion and. every other kind. All permissions save the pre-sumed permission have this note in common, namely, that they are expressions of the will of the superior who knows the wish of the subject and freely grants it. In doing so, he says, equivalently at least, "I grant you permission for this or that object." Yet when we examine the presumed per- 198 THE I~RESUMED PERMISSION mission, we find that the superior cannot say this for the simple reason that he is unaware of the subject's wish. This leads us to conclude that the presumed permission is, not a permission in the strict sense of the word, but it is a legitimate substitution; and the act resulting from a sin-cere presumption, whether it lies in the sphere of poverty or obedience, is quite in accord with the obligations arising from the religious vows. The religious is acting, not in his own name, but with a clear dependence on the will of the superior. To come more properly to an examination of the pre-sumed permission, the following points of division are suggested by the definition of the presumed permission given above. We must consider: I) On the part of thereligious who presumed: a) the inabitit~/ tO obtain permission in one its ordinarg forms, b) the motioes sufficient to justifg a presump-tion; c) a prudent conclusion. Z) On the part of the superior: the different~mental attitudes towards a presumed permission. Our first condition requisite for the legitimate pre-suming of a permission is the inability to obtain permis-sion in one of its ordinary forms because of the absence of the superior. The most circumspect religious may encoun-ter such a situation when both superior and assistant are .abse, nt or indisposed or so occupied as to permit no inter-ruption. If the proposed action of the religious is so urgent as to exclude a delay until such time as the superior may be contacted, permission may be presumed, supposing the .other conditions are fulfilled. In the second place sufficient motives, reducible to ne- 199 JAMES E. RISK cessity or utility, are required to make a presumpt.ion law-ful. Let us suppose that, while traveling, two sisters are caught in a heavy rainstorm that gives little hope of imme-diate abatement. An umbrella would be a very welcome addition to their equipment in the present predicament. To purchase an umbrella without delay may be instru-mental in protecting their health as. well as their clothing. In such straits it would be quite unnecessary to look for a telephone so as to obtain express permission to make this necessary purchase. The same religious now proceed to browse through a book store while waiting for a train. To their pleasant surprise a rare and very valuable book, much sought after by their superior, meets their eye. It is available at an extremely reduced rate. A real service would be rendered the convent by the immediate purchase of such a book. A situation such as this might even justify the conclusion that the permission to buy the book ought to be presumed. The prudent in.terpretation of the superior's mind, the third requisite for a valid presumption, must never be wanting. On this point, the commentators supply us with expressions that furnish a key to the solution of many a problem that in practice may arise when we wish to justify a presumed permission. They say: "_ . it is prudently judged that permission would be given if asked"; "Per-mission reasonably presumed is sometimes sufficient"; "To presume permission is to act conformably to the will of the $a p er" t "o't ; and so forth. "Prudent"l y" , reasonabl"y, and "conformably to the will of the superior" indicate that a well-founded judgment enters into the very character of the presumed permission. Resting on the basis of whim or hallucination, instead of prudence and reflection, the act of the presuming religious is not to be dignified by the title of a permission; it is rather a gratuitous-presumption or 200 THE PRESUMED PERMISSION the sin of proprietorship. The reasons tha~ justify the prudent judgment will at least approximate those which in ordinary circumstances influence the conscientious superior in consenting to the requests of his subjects. Such reasons will be reduced ulti-mately to necessity or utility in harmony with the norms of the particular religious institute of which both superior and subject are members. For each religious order or con-gregation professes a more or less definite standard in these matters, admitting, for example,, in the matter of poverty, the use of some things as necessary or useful, while exclud-ing others as superfluous or even detrimental to the. spirit-ual interests 6f the religious. With this in mind, the reli-gious about to presume a permission knows that the habit-ual attitude of the superior is to abide by these norms in granting permissions, that the object desired in the present emergency has been granted on other occasions by the same superior, that there is no reason that leads him to suspect that in the present situatioi~ the superior would act differ-ently. Thus, a religi6us says to himself, equivalently at least, "If, here and now; I should ask the superior to grant me this request, I am reasonably certain that he would readily grant it." He comes to this conclusion after hav-ing deliberated on his particular rule of life and the habit-ual inclination of ~i conscientious superior. The "if" clause just expressed is always at least implied in the legitim~te presumption. This explains why the presumed permission is sometimes called the conditioned permission. The per-mission that would involve the acceptance of gifts of an incon.sequential value can be much more readily presumed than the more costly kind. Needless to say, in practise the reasoning process re-quired for a presumed permission is far more quickly con-cluded than described. While walking through town, a 201 religious priest meets a crippled beggar, whom he knows to be sincere. He gives the poor man a few small coins on the presumption that his superior would not object. His own particular institute encourages devotion .to the poor and he has seen his superior, a conscientious religious, act in the same generous fashion. His presumption is reason-able; he has "conformed" his action to the .reasonably in-terpreted mind of the superior. I.s. a religious who has legitimately presumed a permis-sion, say in a matter governed by his vow of poverty, later obliged to notify the superior of his act?. The rule may call for such a manifestation in every case of a presumed permission. Supposing such a prescription does not exist, one would not be obliged to notify the superior of articles now consumed which'had been received b~r way of a legiti-mately presumed permission. Objects Of a more enduring nature, received in virtue of a presumed permission, should be made knov~n to the superior. A kind friend, for exam-ple, meets a' religious and invites him to take dinner with him. The religious accepts his friend's gracious invitation. Before parting, the same kind friend presents the religious with a very excellent volume. To what is the religious obliged in the case? We suppose, first of all, that his pre-sumptions in both cases are justified. If the rule of this religious obliges him to manifest all presumed permissions to the superior, his duty is clear. Without such a provision made by his rule, he would not be obliged to acquaint his superior with the fact that he had prudently presumed to take dinner with his friend. If he wishes to keep the vol-ume which he had lawfully presumed to accept, he would be obliged to approach the superior for permission. For while it was inconvenient to make contact with the supe-rior at the moment when he received the book, there should be no special inconvenience involved in asking for permis- 202 THE PRESUMED PERMISSION' sion on his beturn home. In other words, he can lawfully ¯ presume only as long as conditions justify it. Attitudes of Superior Having examined the conditions that warrant a pre-s. umed permission, let us now look briefly at the different attitudes with which a superior may view such presump-tions on the part ~of the subject. We may reduce them to three classes. 1) The first type of superior may be so disposed that he is ready enough, if asked, to grant the ordinary permis-sions, and does not object to the reasonable presuming of the same permissions. It is possible that he has. expressed himself on this point.To ex.emplify: a religious of the community of this superior knows that permission to sub-scribe to useful periodicals is readily granted. He knows too from his close acquaintance with the superior that there is no objection to presumed permissions in ordinary mat-ters. Such a religious, provided there be no insincerity on 'the point, .may presume to subscribe under the ordinary conditions. For he knows, in the language of the theo-logians, that his superior is opposed neither to. the sub-stance of the act (the~ subscription) nor to the mode or manner (by way of a presumed permission). 2) Another superior, perhaps .with a view of check-ing abuse in the matter of poverty, may be decidedly op-posed to his subjects' presuming permissions. So strong may be his attitude that, outside of cases of real emergency, he is prepared to veto the presumed permissions of his sub-jects. A presumed permission then, outside of extraordi-nary circumstances, would be tantamount to a violation of poverty or obedience as the case might be. To resume the example of subscription for periodicals. The superior in question is not opposed to the subscriptions to useful :peri- 203 JAMES E. RISK odicals. So strongly, however, is he opposed to presumed permissions, that he refuses to allow a subject to subscribe without first obtaining express permission. In this case he would object to the substance of the act (the act of subscribing') not because he failed to appreciate the cul-tural value of useful periodicals, but because he would be opposed to the toad/ir~ which such a subscription were made (i.e. by way of the presumed permission). 3) S~ill a third attitude might be evidenced towards the matter of presuming. Admitting the use of presumed permissions as sometimes justifiable, a superior may reveal his general attitude towards presumed permissions as one of reluctance and displeasure. Such a disposition, however, would not necessarily in'dicate his refusal to ratify a pre-sumption once made. The subject of this superior sub-scribes to a periodical and on the arrival of the first issue is reminded that the superior would gladly have granted the permission if asked. Has this religious violated poverty? He may have sinned venially because of the toay in which he obtained the subscription, that is, by presu~ming instead of asking. The substance of the act, namely, the mere sub-scribing, would not necessarily be'sinful, because the supe-rior would have gladly permitted it. Obedience too could be violated, if the religious deliberately acted against the expliCit order of the superior. To complete our consideration of the various attitudes which mayinfluence a superior in .these matters, this ques-tion may be proposed. Suppose that after a sincere and prudent presumption is made, it is totally repudiated by the superior? If, for example, a book were purchased in such circumstances, what could be done? Strictly. speak-ing, the superior might order the return of the book and reimbursement on the part of the proprietor of the book-store, if this were feasible. That would be for the superior 204 THE ~RESUMED PERMISSION to decide. The religious, who in good' faith erroneously estimated his superior's attitude, would in no wise be guilty of a violation of poverty. For in the case he sincerely inter-preted the mind of his superior and concluded that the con-ditions justified his transaction. Conclusion In conclusion, let .us remember that the presumed or interpretative permission, as some authors call it, has a defi-nite place in the life of an observant religious, but that p!ace is reserved for occasions when the ordinary methods to obtain permission cannot be observed. The conscien-tious religious, as we have already stated, will rarely fail to obtain whatever permis.sions are ordinarily necessary by the more express method of asking the superior. A habitual use of presumption can easily lead to laxity in the observ-ance of poverty so essential to a life in religion that is to be led with any degree of sincerity. What must never be. for-gotten is that cooperation is always necessary in the observ-ance of the vow of poverty: the superior should show him-self ready to grant any request in keeping with the particu-lar grade of poverty professed in hisinstitute, since it is not unknown for subjects to violate poverty rather than ap-proach a superio/Who has shown himself less gracious in the question of permissions. Subjects have been known to deliberately violate poverty, I say, not to mention the gratuitous or unnecessary presumption which is another name for the sin of proprietorship. The religious should be habitually disposed to express that dependence on supe-riors for the use of temporal things, not out of a spirit of servitude but out of a desire to imitate Him Who was hungry and Who had nowhere to lay His head. 205 ook Reviews PRINCIPLES OF CHRISTIAN AND RELIGIOUS FERFECTION for the use of the Merlst Brothers of the Schools. Trensleted from the slx~h French edition; revised end enlercjed. Pp. 567. To be procured from the Marlst Brothers, St. Ann's Hermltege, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. $1.~0. Though this book was written for the Marist Brothers, it could be of great service to other religious as well. In fact, it would make an excellent manual of introduction or a good brief guidebook to the spiritual iife in general and particularly to the religious life. It might be used as a sort of text-book for young religious; it was designed to serve that purpose for the Marist novices. It ~s small, but rich in content; its form is that of. question a~ad answer; in presentation of its material, it is systematic, clear, and definite. From it one could get a well ordered and fairly comprehensive knowledge of the practice of the spiritual and religious life. The Introduction supplies general notions on the end of man, holiness, the religious state, and religious institutes. Part I is entitled "General Means of Christian Perfection," and deals with the desire for perfection, prayei, mental prayer, exercises of piety, conscience, Confession, Communion, direction, spiritual reading, the exercise of the presence of God, and various devotions. In Part II, "General Means of Perfection in the Religious Life," are treated religious vocal tion, the noviceship and religious profession, the vows, and the corre-sponding virtues. It closes with a chapter on "Regularity." Part III is concerned with the obstacles to Christian and religious perfection, and the fourth part is devoted to the virtues. To many of the answers "to the questions are added brief further explanations in smaller type. On many points of major importance select quota-tions from the Fathers and Doctors of the Church are givefi; in these the' influence of St. Francis de Sales and St. Alphonsus Liguori is noticeable. The m~iterial make-up, paper, print, and binding, are neat and attractive. A full table of contents, an analytical tab!e, and a good index make it easy to find what the book contains on any particular point.--G. A. ELLARD, S.,J. BLESSED ARETHEY THAT HUNGER. By the Reverend Richard Graef, C;.S.Sp. Trensleted by Sister Mary Hildegerd Windecker, M. A., Sister of the Blessed Sacrament for Indians end Colored People. 206 BOOK REVIEWS Pp. ~vli + 175. Frederick Pustet, Inc., New York, 1942. $2.00. Father Graef attempts in various ways to encourage the good Catholic in the practic.e of a strong and living faith. His main lines of argumentation are the following: A dynamic faith is necessary for personal sanctity; because sanctity demands self-renunciation, and this renunciation will not be made unless one sees clearly and power-fully the value of making it. Such evaluation is had only in the light of faith. Moreover, supernatural efficiency demands the work both of Christ and of the soul. The principal part of the soul's cooperation consists in genuine, earnest desire; and the source of such desire is faith. Finally, the apostolic influence that each soul is called upon to exert in the world, and thus the ultimate mastery of the world by apostolic souls, can be appreciated only when the world is viewed with the eyes of faith. The" author has made frequent and apt use of the Sacred Scrip-tures. Each of the main sections of the book is divided into numer-ous brief topics. The meditative reading of one or two of these topics might prove, helpful to those wlJo are accustomed to make their men-tal prayer in that way.--G. KELLY, S.,I. THE MASS OF BROTHER MICHEL. By Michael Ken÷. Pp. 307. The Bruce Publishing Company, Milwaukee, 1942. $2.S0. Here is a new Catholic novel with an entirely different theme. The setting of the story is sixteenth-century France, a turbulent his-torical period for that country, owing to the threatening Surge of heresy. The spreading falsehoods of Calvin and Luther provide' a dramatic background for the lives of the de Guillemont family, about which the story is told. The interest centers in Michel de Guillemont, the elder son and heir. It is his story from his sincere, impetuous love of Louise to his final unyielding love of God and his Faith in the self-oblation of martyrdom. We share in the tragedy before his contemplated mar-riage that was partly due to the jealousy of his brother Paul and that led to his becoming a saintly religious. We are carried along from the injustice and cruelty of his father to ~he providential meeting with the und.erstanding Father Andr4. We sympathize with him in his deep suffering when the priesthood is denied him. Brother Michel's courageous acceptance of God's will and his intense love of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass keep the interest keen up to the power- 207 BOOK REVIEWS ful climax of his death. The subordinate characters of the least-resisting Paul, the unscru-pulous Anne; the bitter Louise, the heretic Armand, the lovable Father Andre, and others are well portrayed. The story is told with excel-lent description and good use of suspense. The tragic atmosphere is relieved by romance and clever humor. The one striking weakness is the characteristic trait of the modern novel: it leaves untold the retribution due to some charaCters. The Mass of Brother Michel shows the triumph of grace over .personal pain and loss, sin, and human frailty. The passages that deal with the spiritual consolation of the Mass, the reason for pain and suffering in this life, God's love for the sinner, and the courage coming to the soul through prayer are worth reading again and again. Priests, in particular, will find here many inspiring thoughts for practical use and may grow in their appreciation of the privilege of offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.---A. J. DEEMAN, S.J. FAST BY THE ROAD. By John Moody. Pp. xiv + 308. The MacM~llan C~rnpany, New Yorl~, 1941. $2.50. The Wall Street expert on investments and kindred subjects who occasioned not a little surprise a decade ago by embracing the Catholic Faith and reporting the event in the popular The Long Road Home has a new treat for his expanding reading public. The present vol-ume, to quote from the author's foreword, is "an attempt to explain in simple language or by illustration, certain teachings and view. points to be found within the Church which are often misunder-stood by non-Catholics. All this is merely incidental to the general purpose, which is primarily to tell of some of the experiences of one convert .during his first decade as a Catholic." Mr. Moody writes simply, entertainingly, and with precision on a wide variety of subjects connected with his Faith. In his chapters the hard-headed, efficient business man, with the help of God's grace, approaches the Truth. He turns back his cuffs and proceeds to defend it and, campaign for it with gusto. The chapters are topical for the most part, ranging with consider-able agility back and forth over some focal point of Catholicity by means of observation, analysis, chance discussion, and illustrative anecdote. Their cumulative effect is to deepen one's gratitu.de for the gift of Faith and to jolt one anew with the realization that most of 208 BOOK REVIEWS one's non-Catholic friends and neighbors are totally ignorant of or gr6ssly misunderstand the Catholic concept of supernatural life, and are usually indifferent to it. And Mr. Moody, so thoroughly at home in the Church after his ten years as a Catholic, writes with more than ordinary authority and perception of .the money-mad, speed-benumbed, materialistic American mentality. The book is recommended especially to those in search of reading matter never heavy or tiring yet providing food for serious thought --and prayer. The chapters m~y be read in any order, and any or all of them would be suitable for refectory reading.--C. DEMUTH, THE CATHOLIC REVIVAL IN ENGLAND. Pp. ix -I- 102. The MacMillan Company, MEDIEVAL HUMANISM. By the Reverend Pp. ix -!- 103. The MacMillan Company, By John J. O'Connor. New York, 1942. $1.00. Gerald G. Walsh, S.J. New York, 1942. $1.00. These books are respectively the third and fourth volumes in The Christendom Series. According to the announcement of the publishers, "this is a series of popular books on important topics in the history of Christendom, prepared under the auspices of the Con-fraternity of Christian Doctrine . The books are intended to provide informative reading for both Catholic and non-Catholic readers; for study clubs in the parochial units of~the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine: for study groups in the Newman Clubs: as collateral texts in colleges, normal schools, and senior high ~and preparatory schools.'~ Both books appear to measure up very well to the purpose of the series. Professor O'Connor's book gives a fine sweeping picture of that very important period in English life known as "The Catholic Revival," the story of the gradual breaking away from the tyranny of th~ penal laws to the winning of freedom and influence for Cath-olics. Father Walsh's book puts within the reach of the ordinarily intelligent reader with good educational background an illuminating study of the meaning of "Humanism" and of the development of Christian Humanism through the middle ages till it reached its high point in Dante. Bibliographical notes are appended to each book. Father Walsh has also included an abstract for study and review which should prove very helpful.~. KELLY, S.d. 209 Decisions o[ !:he Holy MEANS OF COMMUNICATING WITH THE HOLY SEE A communication from the Most Reverend Apostolic Delegate to the Most Reverend Ordinaries reads as follows:. "In order to remedy, the difficulties of correspondence with the Holy See, His Eminence the Cardinal Secretary of State has'directed me to inform the Diocesan and Religious Ordinaries and Superiors of this country'that in the present circumstances they may recur to the Holy See through this Apostolic Delegation, and so avail themselves of the facilities at our disposal. This office makes frequent use of radiograms, and also of the air-mails to Lisbon wblch, however, are not as regular as formerly. "Upon the receipt of the petitions of Religious for faculties and dispens,ations, this Delegation will communicate with the .Holy See by radiogram or by other channdls, according to the possibilities and the circumstances. When a response has been received from the Holy See, the relative rescript will be issued by this Delegation, in accord-ance with instructions already given or to be given in particular cases. "When requests are made for the renewal of a faculty, the orig-inal rescript should be presented with the petition for renewal. "The Holy. See hopes in this way to continue to correspond with the Religious !n this country and to furnish every assistance to them." 1942, March 21. At the request of many members of the Hier-archy, heads Of universities, and authorities in the world of science, among them members of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, His Holiness Pope Pius XII proclaimed Saint Albert the Great to be the heavenly patron of natural sciences. The Most Reverend Martin Gillet, Master General of the Order of Preachers, read the Brief at a solemn meeting held in the Pontifical International Institute Ahgeli- CUmo 1941, November 18. The Sacred Congregation of Rites held a preparatory session in the cause of the Servant of God, Catherine Tekakwitha, Indian virgin, to discuss the heroicity of the virtues practised by her. 210 .uesffons and Answers !1. According +o our constitutions. +he members of our congregation pronoun~:e temporary vows for three years, +hen take. perpetual vows unless, for a very serious reason, a sister is obl;gecl by superior~ to renew her temporary vows for another period of three years. At the end of +ha+ time she must either pronounce perpetual vows or seek~ an inchlt from the S. Congregation of Religious for a fur+her ex+en-sion of temporary vows if she is not 1o return to the world. Recently this latter c~se occurred, but the rescript was delayed, "and the sister d~d not renew her temporary vows until twelve days after they had' expired. In this case, did +he sister cease +o be a member of +he congregation on the day on which her vows expired, and were her subsequent vows invalid? The sister would not cease to be a member of the congregation. by the mere fact that an interval of time elapsed between the expira-tion of the temporary vows and their renewal, unless the superior had positively ordered her to leave and to return to the world. As the case is presented, it is not clear whether or not the constitutions allow this appeal to the S. Congregation of Religious.

Richard Richards ; The Weber and Davis County Communities Oral History Collection include interviews of citizens from several different walks of life. These interviews were conducted by Stewart Library personnel, WeberState University faculty and students, and other members of the community. The histories cover various topics and chronicle the personal everyday life experiences and other recollections regarding the history of the Weber and Davis County areas. ; 81p.; 29cm.; 2 bound transcripts; 4 file folders. 1 video disc: digital; 4 3/4 in. ; Oral History Program Richard Richards Interviewed By Rebecca Ory Hernandez 7 August 2012 13 August 2012 24 September 2012 i ii Oral History Program Weber State University Stewart Library Ogden, Utah Richard Richards Interviewed by Rebecca Ory Hernandez 7 August 2012 13 August 2012 24 September 2012 Copyright © 2013 by Weber State University, Stewart Library iii Mission Statement The Oral History Program of the Stewart Library was created to preserve the institutional history of Weber State University and the Davis, Ogden and Weber County communities. By conducting carefully researched, recorded, and transcribed interviews, the Oral History Program creates archival oral histories intended for the widest possible use. Interviews are conducted with the goal of eliciting from each participant a full and accurate account of events. The interviews are transcribed, edited for accuracy and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewees (as available), who are encouraged to augment or correct their spoken words. The reviewed and corrected transcripts are indexed, printed, and bound with photographs and illustrative materials as available. Archival copies are placed in the University Archives, which also houses the original recording so researchers can gain a sense of the interviewee's voice and intonations. Project Description The Weber and Davis County Communities Oral History Collection include interviews of citizens from several different walks of life. These interviews were conducted by Stewart Library personnel, Weber State University faculty and students, and other members of the community. The histories cover various topics and chronicle the personal everyday life experiences and other recollections regarding the history of the Weber and Davis County areas. ____________________________________ Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account. It reflects personal opinion offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ____________________________________ Rights Management All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to the Stewart Library of Weber State University. No part of the manuscript may be published without the written permission of the University Librarian. Requests for permission to publish should be addressed to the Administration Office, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, Utah, 84408. The request should include identification of the specific item and identification of the user. It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows: Richards, Richard, an oral history by Rebecca Ory Hernandez, 7 and 13 August 2012 and 24 September 2012, WSU Stewart Library Oral History Program, University Archives, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, UT. Richard Richards October 2012 1 Abstract: Richard "Dick" Richards, WSU alum, attorney, author and Republican Party National Committee Chairman (1981), grew up in Ogden, Utah and became involved with politics as a young man in high school. Richard is now retired and resides in South Ogden, Utah after spending most of his political career in Washington D.C. He sat down with Rebecca Ory Hernandez from Weber State University to discuss his life growing up in Ogden, his family, education, career and devotion to Weber State University. Richard endowed the "Richard Richards Institute of Politics and Ethics" at Weber State University which awards scholarships to high school students, and currently serves on the board. He and his wife, Annette Bott Richards, have five children. ROH: Today we are beginning an oral history with Richard Richards in his home in South Ogden, Utah. My name is Rebecca Ory Hernandez. Why don't we go ahead with you just stating your name and where this interview is being held? RR: My name is Richard Richards, most people call me Dick. I'm in my home at 5273 Daybreak in South Ogden. I'm prepared to discuss my early history with Rebecca and I look forward to it. ROH: When and where were you born? RR: I was born in Ogden at the old Dee Hospital on May 14, 1932. Nearly all my brothers and sisters were born at the same hospital and had the same doctor, but that was a long time ago. The hospital is now gone. ROH: Where did you grow up? 2 RR: I grew up in South Ogden. I lived in Ogden until I was about 12 years old, and then moved to South Ogden and lived here until I was drafted into the army in 1952. ROH: What part of South Ogden? RR: My first home in South Ogden was 3999 Norton Avenue. That's just next to 40th Street and 40th Street was the dividing line between Ogden and South Ogden. My father bought that home during the war. It was a 1,000 square foot home and I had seven sisters and a brother. So, 11 of us lived in this 1,000 square foot home. There were a couple of bedrooms in the basement that accommodated us, but 11 people in that small home. I can't even remember how we ate dinner. There's no way we could have eaten at the same time because the kitchen wasn't that big. I have no recollection of how exactly we operated in the home, but we lived there for several years. ROH: Where did you fall in the family line-up of children? RR: My brother was the oldest child and I was next to him about a year and a half later. All seven girls came after me. Four of them were born in the month of May one year apart, so the family grew rapidly and it was all girls after my brother and me. ROH: I can't imagine having that many children under one roof. RR: I don't know how we did it. I really don't. I had one sister that was really fastidious and she needed the bathroom for a long time. We agreed that she could have 3 the bathroom for an hour starting at six o'clock in the morning. After that the family had it. ROH: Are all of your siblings still around? RR: One of them passed away. That's the one I was talking about. All of the others are scattered around from California, Idaho, Oregon and I have two sisters living in the Ogden area. ROH: Do you stay in touch with them? RR: We have family reunions. We just had one at Park City in July. We had 123 family members there. We've been doing this for about 20 years and we have not had one death in the family or one child born with severe disabilities out of all 153 of us. We have been a blessed group. We have MBA's, Ph.D's, and a couple of doctors. We've got some pretty good children and grandchildren. My father came from the coal mining camps of Utah when he was in the tenth grade. He didn't graduate from high school. He was tired of living in the coal mines and said, "I'm not going to be a miner, I'm getting out of here." He went up to Salt Lake and got a job helping a sign painting company called Bird and Jex Company. Later on, he decided he didn't want to work for them and he set up his own company here in Ogden. His first shop was no bigger than this living room, but he's the guy that brought us out of the coal mines. ROH: What was the name of the sign shop? 4 RR: Richards Sign Company. That was a long time ago, but that business still carries the name. It's gone through three generations. My father had a stroke many years ago and as a result he couldn't work so he sold his business to a guy by the name of Derek Warner. He ran it for some period of time, then he retired and gave it to his son. His son retired and now it's the next generation working the Richards Sign Company. The company was so well respected that no matter who owned it, they wanted to keep the name. It's still there on Grand Avenue and a bustling business, but it's different. They don't even have a paint brush down there anymore because everything is done by computer. When my dad sold it, we did it all by hand. ROH: Did you learn how to paint signs as well? RR: I did and I earned my living painting signs while I was in law school. Even after I graduated and I was practicing law, the income was so meager that at night I painted signs to make some money to take care of my family. I always hoped that potential clients didn't see me painting signs or they'd wonder about my ability as a lawyer. ROH: That's interesting. What about your mother? RR: My mother lived in Ogden. She met my father in a church activity and her father was a railroader and they lived down on Grant Avenue. My mother did graduate from high school and I don't know if she worked before they were married. ROH: Do you recall which high school she graduated from? 5 RR: It would have been Ogden High School because that's the only one there was. ROH: Okay. They met at a church activity, but can you be more specific? RR: Apparently, it was a Golden Green Ball, a dance of some kind where my father met my mother or shortly after because they participated in the dance and won a prize. A great uncle of mine introduced them. AR: What I understand is that she had caught his eye and she was walking along the street and he pulled over and said, "Could I have a date?" She said, "Yes, if you'll go to church with me." They did enter a contest with the Golden Green Ball and they won. ROH: Did you inherit their love of dancing? RR: No. I don't' dance. ROH: I'm surprised. I thought all politicians liked to dance. AR: He's got a son that dances. ROH: What were some of the things you did as a young person? RR: Before we moved out to South Ogden, I lived on Monroe and we played Kick-the- Can and all kinds of games in the streets. We didn't have television of course. We didn't pay too much attention to radio so we played outside. We played with each other. ROH: Where did you go to school? 6 RR: I went to school first at Quincy for the first grade and so on. Later on, I went to Madison. I was at Madison for a while, then my family went to South Ogden and I went to Riverdale Junior High School. After Riverdale I went to Weber High School. ROH: So you lived on Monroe for a little while? RR: Yes on 26th and Monroe. The family lived there, but as the family grew and more kids were born in the family we had to find a bigger place and my dad bought a house in South Ogden during the war for about $5,000. The house we lived in on Monroe is now a little parking lot for a neighbor. There's nothing there, but it was a very small yard and very small house. ROH: Are there any memories that you have from being at Quincy or Madison that you'd like to share? RR: Not at Qunicy, but when I moved to Madison, I was the newcomer and they had to see whether I was tough enough to be in that environment. They picked fights with me and forced me to fight. I wasn't going to fight. Kids carried me over to the park across the street and I was to fight with a guy and I beat him up, so I was successful there. Then, I had to try one more and I got in a fist fight during art class. The teacher came down, banged our heads together and stopped us. I punched the guy in the nose and his nose was bleeding. I was crying and I didn't want to fight. The teacher came down and knocked our heads together. The guy I was fighting hauled off and punched her and knocked her down. He was expelled from school. They didn't do anything to me because they knew I didn't 7 want to fight with this guy and that was apparent. He was kind of a bully and it was good. I passed the test fighting those two guys and from then on I was accepted. ROH: I just can't imagine that. Annette said she had something she wanted to share. AR: An interesting thing, I was at Quincy School and I was standing over by the water fountain. His brother, Jim, was a year older than me and Dick was a year younger than me. I remember thinking, "Oh, that's Jimmy Richard's little brother." He was running around. That was our first meeting and then he went to Madison and I continued on at Quincy. ROH: Okay. Were there any favorite subjects that stood out to you at that time as a young boy? RR: I liked the art classes, but we didn't have many of them until I went to high school. I was not a good student. I was a troublemaker and I just got by as far as the academics were concerned. There was always trouble, and a lot of it was my fault. I remember when I went to Riverdale Junior High School we rode the bus from South Ogden out to Riverdale and there was a kid in the neighborhood by the name of Tommy James. Tommy crowded in front of us in line for the bus. As I walked past him he took a seat up front and I hauled off and smacked him in the back of the head. When we got to Riverdale I chased him down and picked a fight with him and he just beat the hell out of me. That was the only time I was ever really beat up. He just kept pounding me, the big tall guy with long arms and I would be swinging at him and I'd be missing him by about four of five inches. 8 Incidentally, the principal came down and grabbed us and took us up to the principal's office. He said he was going to give us the board of education. He had a board that he used to paddle kids with and the board had holes in it so he could get a good swift whack. He asked what happened and I owned up. I said, "I picked the fight, it's my fault." I guess that impressed him and he said, "Well, get going and get back to class and I don't want any more of this." ROH: In junior high, Did you have any particular subject that you were fond of? RR: No, I was just getting by doing what I could do. ROH: Being a kid. RR: We rode the bus and I always rose a rumpus on the bus, so the driver kicked me out and said, "You're going to walk home." I said, "Okay." Instead of walking home I went around to the back of the bus and climbed in the window on the side he couldn't see. I rode in the bus with him until we got to Ogden and we got to the bus stop. I jumped out the window and ran up front and said, "Haha Clink, I beat you." He felt bad that he was going to make me walk and before he left he said, "Hey where's the Richards kid, I was only joking I wasn't going to make him walk." I played a joke on Clink. Incidentally, I've had an occasion to work with the Fernilius' again in my business. When we get to that I'll tell you. ROH: You went to Weber High. Tell me about that experience. RR: Well, I shaped up. ROH: Did your parents have a car growing up? 9 RR: Yes. In fact, I remember when I was six years old my brother and I had our tonsils taken out. We went to the doctor's office in the old First Security Bank building and had our tonsils removed. My father picked us up in his brand new Pontiac car. He paid $600 and got a beautiful blue Pontiac car. That's the first car I can remember my folks had. ROH: When you were young, do you remember where you went shopping for new supplies and clothes and things like that? RR: As a kid, I didn't do that. I don't remember that. As I grew up a little bit I remember being in town because I would go to the paramount theater that had the Popeye club. On Saturdays, they'd have Popeye and a series of the Lone Ranger or something and I remember going to town for that. Other than that, I don't remember going to town. ROH: In town are you talking about Ogden? RR: Yes, I'm still talking about Ogden. These were younger years. ROH: Is this the 25th Street area? RR: Yes. Actually there were several theaters in town at that time. There was an Orpheum, a Colonial, Lyseum, The Egyptian, and the Paramount. That's five theaters. Most of the kids went to the Paramount because that had the Popeye Club and the series. Movies cost about a dime and I would work around the yard and I'd get a dime or 25 cents and I was able to go to the movies. ROH: Okay, so we're going to go back to high school now. 10 RR: Before high school, let me talk about Riverdale Junior High School because that was really a turning point for me. That was a rough school. When I went there I was in the 7th and 8th grades and we were rough on teachers there. We drove a couple of teachers out of the room crying. There were several of us that were involved in this kind of stuff. ROH: How did you do that? RR: Just by not paying attention or throwing spit balls or whatever. We drove a couple of substitute teachers out of there. We were upstairs in a room that was called Idaho because it was kind of shaped like Idaho. My friend and I were in the back of the room raising the devil and there were two kids in the middle of the room that were raising Cain and the teacher came in and he just stood there with his arms folded for a few minutes waiting for everybody to shut up. They didn't shut up so he walked down the aisle and gave each of these kids a karate chop on the side of the head and whacked them in the kidney and knocked both of them out. Both of the kids fell with their faces on the desk and my friends and I shut up. That cured us. He really knocked the two kids out. One of the kids' families sued him because when he hit him in the kidneys he bruised him. This teacher didn't say anything and I don't know what happened to him, but I didn't see him again. That was sort of a turning point for a lot of us. After I left junior high school and went to Weber I shaped up. It was a 180 degree change for me. ROH: How many kids were in your class in junior high? RR: I would say there were 20 or something like that. 11 ROH: That was a good-sized class. Is there anything else from junior high that you can recall? What was your favorite part about being in school? RR: Recess. I remember I was supposed to be in arithmetic class, but before the class started I went down to the shop. There was nobody in there except a few kids. The teacher wasn't there and I had never had any experience with some of these tools like the buzz saw. I picked up a chunk of wood and I was going to cut it, but I put it in the wrong way in the saw. It threw the wood and knocked the window out of the class. It would have killed a kid if it hit him. I didn't know what I was doing. I got out of there and sneaked into my arithmetic class by crawling on my hands and knees to the desk so the teacher wouldn't see me coming in. It was a funny school, I had a friend called Toshi Shiba and he went around the junior high school with a water gun and he would shoot the light bulbs and it would pop them. In those days they didn't have a chandelier glass over them, they just had a globe. My friend went around shooting those things and the shop teacher caught him and grabbed him and shook him up and said, "I never did like you Japs anyway." Nothing ever happened as a result of that, but today that would be a disaster. ROH: It sounds like you were a bit precocious. RR: I was not a good little boy. I never did anything really bad, but I did a lot of things that were border line. ROH: Did your parents ever get called to school? 12 RR: No, and I never told them when I had a couple of teachers assault me in junior high school. One guy was a music teacher and he was in the auditorium with the music class and a kid in that class had stolen my baseball mitt. I spotted it because it had my name on it. He had used a leather puncher to punch holes in it so that my name would not be visible, but I saw it anyway. I went into the class and confronted the kid about the mitt. The teacher said, "You get out of here." I said, "I'm not going until I get my mitt." He came down and grabbed me by the shirt and took me out in the hall and he was slapping me on the side of the face front-hand and back-hand. He hit me several times, but I never told my parents about that. You know, that just happened. It was not uncommon in the schools for a teacher to whack a kid. ROH: That is true. Moving on to high school at Weber High, where was Weber High? RR: Weber High School was on 12th and Washington Blvd. We had to take a bus from home to school. When I got into high school I really settled down. It was a major change in my life. I was elected sophomore class president when I went out there. Right out of this junior high school environment to the high school and we had kids from other junior high schools come in from Eden and Huntsville. I don't know the circumstances, but I was elected sophomore class president. ROH: You don't recall running for president? RR: No, I don't recall any of that except that I was elected and I was in a sign painting class and I painted some signs for sophomore assemblies. I misspelled the word "sophomore." They said, "It's got an "o" in it." 13 ROH: You said you got more serious in high school. What were your academics like? RR: I was a good student. It was the beginning of a new life for me. AR: One of the teachers said that Dick was the worst and best student that she ever had. ROH: Did you go to high school together? AR: No, I went to Ogden High School. ROH: Did you have a favorite subject in high school? RR: Yes, I liked the debate class and I participated in the debates and extemporaneous competitions and I did well. So, I did a lot of it. It's interesting because the debate teacher at Weber High School was the same principal that dragged me up to the principal's office when I was at Riverdale. ROH: Is that right? He moved from the other school to that school. He must have had some kind of impact on you. Who were your friends in high school? RR: I had several that lived out here in South Ogden like, George Palmer, Carl Hassel and Bud Reed. I had a lot of friends. We did things in a group out here. Nobody played alone. ROH: What were some of the things you were involved in other than debate? Were you involved in any clubs or activities? RR: No, because I worked after school. Instead of taking the school bus, I would take the city bus and go from 12th Street down to my dad's shop and work after 14 school. I didn't have any time for any of the athletics. I did win the intramural boxing championship for my weight when I was in high school. I didn't play football, basketball, or baseball or anything. Those intramurals took place within the classroom for the most part. ROH: So you continued to fight in high school. You got into boxing? RR: Not a lot, but we had an intramurals program in boxing and I won that in my class. I boxed with the kids that were in the other class. I also wrestled. I met another kid in the other class wrestling, I got down on the mat like you're supposed to and he was over me and the referee said, "Go!" He pinned me so fast I didn't even know what I was doing. I was out of that competition in 15 seconds, just as long as it took for the referee to count me out. This kid was a skinny kid with a glass eye and he went on to win the state championship in his weight a couple of years. He was a very good wrestler. I think his name was Garcia. ROH: So, if you ran for sophomore class president, you were interested in politics at that time. RR: Yes, and that is one of the things that I gravitated toward was the speech class and the debate and that sort of thing. About that time I had developed my philosophy as a Republican. One of my debate partners was a democrat, one that I called the yellow dog democrat. He would rather vote for a yellow dog than a Republican and that's still his philosophy. My father talked politics to us at the dinner table. He talked about a conservative writer at that time called Westbrook 15 Pegler. Pegler was a conservative and he hated the Roosevelts. Most of his column was anti-Franklin and Eleanor and my dad talked about that. There were also some things happening in our life that got me to be a conservative. During that time when we were growing up, we had a coal furnace. The coal man would come to your house, open the coal chute and empty the coal out in the basement. John L. Lewis was the head of the coal miners' union and he called a strike. When he called a strike, we couldn't get coal and everybody complained about that. Even my grandmother and my father complained about it. My father said, "I'm not going to be at the mercy of John L Lewis," and he changed the coal furnace to a gas furnace. John L. Lewis was really big at that time. ROH: When was this? RR: I would say in the early 1940's. Coal mining was a big deal. My grandfather was a coal miner and he still lived down in Carbon County. Coal miners liked John L. Lewis because he got the wages up. He forced people to pay more and if they weren't willing to do that he would call a strike and limit the coal production. My dad talked about that a lot at the dinner table and that had an influence on me. ROH: Who was your friend that was the person who would vote for anyone but a Republican? RR: Jerry Hatch. He was my debate partner. His dad was in the state legislator as a democrat. Jerry always was a democrat. He never changed. He is still a democrat. 16 ROH: When you were in high school did you realize that you wanted to go to college at that point? RR: Yes. In fact, I wanted to be a lawyer at that time and when I wrote my name on the book just to identify it as my book I would write, "Richard Richards Esquire." AR: I've got a page out of something when he was the student of the year and he tells what he wants to do in the future. RR: When I was a senior in high school, I was chosen to give the Valedictory speech. I was not the Valedictorian, but I was chosen to give that speech at the graduation. ROH: So you ran for president and got interested in debate, how did that come about? Were you listening to the radio at that point or did you hear other people speak that influenced you? RR: We listened to the radio and read the newspaper. We always had newspapers and I even take four newspapers here now. I spend a couple hours every day reading the Wall Street Journal and the Investor's Business Daily, The Standard, and Deseret News. ROH: That's incredible. Did your dad take a lot of newspapers too at your house? RR: I don't know how many he took, but I know we took some. ROH: I was just trying to find out where the influence of the debate would have come from because you were interested in both battling physically and verbally so I find that fascinating. 17 RR: Well, I think the word "debate" means to "beat down." ROH: Did you have teachers that inspired you in high school? RR: My debate teacher was the principal out at Riverdale that banged my head. He was my coach all the way through. ROH: You were in school and you were working so give me an idea of your schedule. RR: I would go to school and after school at 3:30 p.m. I would go to my dad's shop and work for a couple of hours and go home. I always worked on Saturdays. My dad probably was the greatest influence on me of anybody because he always said, "I'm not going to give you money, but I'll give you a job. You can work for it and you can have the money." That's the way he was. ROH: So you were student of the year in your high school. RR: Well I don't know if that's what they called it, but maybe they did. ROH: Yes, we will get a copy of this. I'm looking at a photograph that says, "The typical boy graduate is Dick Richards, he's only 5'8" but he has short brown hair and warm brown eyes. He likes school this year but in the past years he skipped school every chance he got. Now he's sorry he's leaving." Is this college or high school? RR: That's high school. ROH: Do you remember what you talked about in your speech? 18 RR: I don't think I have a copy of that speech, but I have a copy of my college speech when I spoke at graduation there. ROH: You were public speaking at a young age. We're going to finish up talking about high school years and move on to college. When you graduated from high school, you wrote the commencement speech. What did you do after high school? RR: Obviously, during the summer I worked for my dad. In the Fall I enrolled at Weber Junior College. Weber Junior College at that time was on 25th Street at about Monroe and Madison. There were about four buildings there and one of them is still there— it's the Deseret Gym building. The other buildings are gone. It was a very small school. Interestingly enough, the president of that school was Dr. Henry Aldus Dickson. He knew an awful lot of the kids by name. We were all very friendly with him. He took a liking to me and I'm not sure why, but he said to me one time, "Dick, are you having a little trouble raising money to go to school?" I said, "Yeah, I'm working but I don't have the money yet." He said, "Well, you drop in my office and see the secretary and she'll give you a scholarship." So I walked in the office and they gave me a twenty-five dollar scholarship. That was a full quarter's tuition. I actually have a copy of that scholarship. ROH: That's fantastic. RR: He liked me and he wanted to help me out. I guess he knew I came from a family of a lot of kids. All of my siblings were still at home. ROH: Did your brother ahead of you go to college? 19 RR: I don't remember. I guess he went to college before me, but I didn't have a lot of relationship with my brother at that time. He was a year and a half older than me and he had different friends. We did some things together, but mostly we each had our own friends. ROH: What did you study at Weber College? RR: I studied debate, philosophy, political science, and economics. I did a lot of those subjects, I didn't do any basket weaving and that stuff. No political correctness at that time. I got enough credits in what I studied in history, philosophy and economics that I was able to transfer them to law school without having a bachelor's degree. When I applied to law school they said, "Well you haven't got a bachelor's degree, you can't come here with what you've got." I said, "Look at the catalog." The catalog said, "153 acceptable hours," or something and I had them. I said, "There they are." He said, "Well, I guess you're right." They enrolled me in law school without having a degree from Weber. ROH: Where was that? RR: University of Utah law school. ROH: How old were you when you started law school? RR: I started law school after I'd been in the army and returned, so there's a gap there. ROH: Did you go into the army after Weber? 20 RR: In August of 1952, I was drafted. The Korean War was on and we were all drafted. It was kind of interesting at that time because there was a lady by the name of Agnus Christe who was the head of the selective service office who really resented Mormon kids going on missions and not going in the army. So, the day you turned 18 you got a draft notice. You couldn't go on a mission. ROH: Did you have any other friends that you were in the army with at that time? RR: I was drafted ahead of my friends for some reason by a matter of a few months. I was drafted with one kid from Ogden by the name of Jim Pollus and we went to basic training together. I went on to leadership and OCS and he did not. He's passed away since. My friends I had here in South Ogden came to Fort Ord after several months that I had already been there so I was ahead of them in the army. ROH: Well, we just kind of skimmed over Weber College, so the next time we meet we'll talk about Weber College, the Army, and Law School. Thank you very much for sharing your young years with me and we will continue next time. This is the end of the interview on August 7, 2012. Thank you. RR: You're Welcome. ROH: Today is Monday, August 13, 2012. We are in the home of Richard Richards, who goes by Dick. I am Rebecca Ory Hernandez from Weber State University and we are going to continue his oral history. We will pick up with your university years from where we left off last week. Why don't you tell me a little bit about your time in law school? 21 RR: After I came home from the Army, I decided to go to law school. I had done some other things in the meantime, but when I found out I was going to go to law school I needed some more credit hours. I went back to Weber and picked up some more hours in political science, history, and philosophy. I was married and had two children. I had to work because I had to make a living, so I worked for my father part-time and painted signs. I worked in Ogden for my dad about 20 hours a week and went to law school. That was an hour a day going down and an hour a day going back. That didn't leave me a lot of time for studying. I really didn't study very hard in law school, but I studied all day Sunday and started at 5:00 a.m. It was a tough grind. I decided it ought to be easier if I lived in Salt Lake because I wouldn't have to commute. So, I got a job with the state liquor commission. It was a political job. Governor Clyde was the governor and I think Laurence Burton was his assistant at that time. Anyway, I got a job with the liquor commission selling liquor out on 23rd South and 13th East. They paid $1.65 an hour and that wasn't enough for me to make a living so I decided even though I'm going to live in Salt Lake I better commute to Ogden to work because I could make $2.50 an hour painting signs. I moved to Salt Lake to the student housing. It was called "Stadium Village." That's where the stadium is now. Rent was $30.00 a month so it was livable for a student. While I was in law school, I was active with the Young Republicans and I was asked to become the Young Republicans state chairman. I didn't know about that because it takes time and doesn't pay so I thought I'd 22 better check with the Dean. He said, "I think you could be of help to us so you go ahead and take that job." I took it and the interesting thing is, later on when the law school was trying to get an appropriation from the state legislature to build a new law school. Jerry Hanson and I invited his grandfather who was a leader in the state legislature to come to the law school and see what kind of shabby condition it was in. He visited the law school and said, "Boy, this is bad." Our main classroom in the law school was a row of tables about 24 inches deep and about six or eight feet long and they were covered with Masonite. They were really old-fashioned. The chairs were all separate and it was a noisy place. When they saw that they said, "Let's make an appropriation for a new law school." They usually invited the governor to come speak on "Law Day" which was the first of May. The assistant dean said, "The governor doesn't like lawyers, he won't come here." I was up to the governor's office talking to Laurence and I asked, "Would the governor like to go up to the University of Utah law school and speak on May Day?" He said, "Sure, we'd love to do that, but we haven't had an invitation." I asked, "Will you come if you get an invitation?" They said, "Yes." I drove back to the law school and went in the dean's office and said, "The governor would like to come if you'll give him and invitation. You type one up and I'll hand carry it to him." He was really pleased that we could get the governor there. The assistant dean that said the governor wouldn't come was embarrassed. ROH: Who was the governor at the time? 23 RR: George Dewey Clyde. The dean of the law school was Dean Diksra. He was a good dean. The assistant was a fellow by the name of Emory. Emory was a democrat and he didn't want the governor up there anyway. ROH: It must have been really good for the law school. RR: These were big helps in getting a new law school. Anyway, I hadn't graduated because I was seven hours short for graduation. I did it in two years. I didn't have time to go for three years. I was married with kids and didn't have time for that. I took extra credit and went through the summers. A couple of the fellows were in the same plight so we asked if we could take the Bar early with the preceding class. They agreed to let us take it. We took the Bar and I passed the Bar before I graduated. I had to go back to pick up seven more hours. Needless to say, I wasn't a very diligent student after having passed the Bar already. They changed the system after that. From then on you had to have a degree. They won't let you take the Bar until you've completed law school. We ruined that for the next-comers. ROH: Did you specialize in anything in law school? RR: No, I just graduated. I was not at the top of my class. I was in the top third of the class, but I did not strive to be number one. I didn't have time to study and do all that because I was working. In fact, working 20 hours was against the rules. They said if you go to law school you can't work 20 hours because you wouldn't be able to keep up. They tested me when they found out I was traveling to Ogden, but I did okay and that all worked out. After I got out of law school, I got a 24 job with the Clayton and Gould law firm in Ogden. Since they were both prosecutors I couldn't do any criminal work. If you can't do criminal work as a young lawyer, you're never going to do any trial work. I said, "I want to get courtroom practice so I'm going to quit." I quit and went on my own. I remember my first month I did not make one dime practicing law. The second month I made $50. It was a struggle. By the end of the year I was making pretty good money, but our total was $6,000 a year my first year. ROH: Do you remember your first case? RR: Yes. I remember my first major cases anyway. I went to the judges and said, "I want to try lawsuits. Give me your guys in jail who don't have any money and can't bail out and I'll represent them for free." Between the judges they gave me ten felons and they were spread out over about a year's time. I got eight acquittals out of the ten. Immediately, I had a lot of criminal clients. They would ask, "Who's your attorney?" They would give them my name and that generated a lot of business for me. I got tired of the criminal stuff, but it was a great experience to try the cases. The first murder case I had was a fellow that came into town on a Greyhound bus, got out of the bus station, walked across the street to the Friendly Tavern, pulled out a pistol and said, "So you're the "blankety-blank"?" He shot a guy about seven times. That was Joe Edgington. He killed him right on the spot. He didn't even know him and the guy was completely nuts. He thought he was somebody else. He casually walked across the street toward the police 25 station. Several witnesses saw him throw the gun in the bushes and keep on walking and they arrested him. L.G. Bingham and I were assigned to defend him pro bono and that was my first major criminal case. L.G. Bingham, in my opinion, was the smartest lawyer in town. He was a good thinker, but he was not a real studious guy and he didn't spend a lot of time preparing the case. Sometimes he would go into court without any defense in mind. He'd find a defense as the prosecutors put on their case. He won a lot of cases. He was very talented in doing that. He and I defended this guy and ended up pleading "not guilty" by reason of insanity. That stuck and he went to a mental institution. I haven't heard anything from him since. That was my first case. L.G. Bingham and I defended another case of a couple of fellows that murdered a man on North Ogden Divide. Maybe you read about it. They picked up a sailor from Salt Lake and took him up to Ogden. They'd been drinking and they thought he had money so they took him up to rob him. The guy resisted and they hit him. They took off all his clothes, threw him in the car and left the guy naked. He was walking down the highway naked and finally fell over the side and froze to death. They were looking through his clothes because they thought he had some money in it. They looked through his shirt and no money in his shirt and threw it out the window as they traveled down the canyon. There was no money in the pants, so they threw the pants out along with the shoes and socks. His clothes were strewn down the canyon for a half a mile and nobody really understood what it was all about. One of the boys called the police and gave himself up. They arrested the other guy a few days later. Ray defended one of 26 them and I defended the other one. They got off with a voluntary manslaughter and two years in prison. They were young guys, drinking and doing stupid stuff and ended up killing a man. I tried cases from 1961 until 1980 when I went to Washington to work full-time with Ronald Reagan. I did spend some time in the early 1960's in Washington with Laurence Burton. That was for two years. I was there at the time that John Kennedy was killed and the Senator of Texas and John F. Kennedy's Vice President, Lyndon Johnson, became the president. ROH: How did it come about that you ended up moving to Washington? RR: Laurence Burton asked me to help him on his campaign. I was one of two major campaign managers on his campaign for congress and he won. He invited me to come back to Washington. I went back there as his legislative assistant and after a year I was made his administrative assistant. Dr. Aldus Dickson, who was a good friend of mine as I indicated earlier said, "Dick, do not stay there more than two years. Laurence is going to ask you to stay, but don't do it." ROH: Why not? RR: He said, "If you do you'll get caught up as a professional staffer in Washington and you'll never develop a career of you own." The pay is good and it's an exciting thing if you're a staffer to a senator and they have big issues. I followed his advice and I came home. ROH: When did you come home? 27 RR: I came home in 1964. I was here when the election was held and Barry Goldwater was soundly defeated. I decided I wanted to run for party chairman. I'd been Young Republican chairman, so I ran for party chairman and won overwhelmingly. The reason I did is because while I was working for Laurence I traveled to all of the counties in the state when they held their county convention. Those were the guys that were going to be delegates to the state convention. When I met them on the county level and they came to the state, they at least knew who I was. I ran against a guy from Salt Lake that should have won. He had a lot of money, was a prominent business guy, and kind of a moderate fellow, but I beat him about six or seven to one. Afterward he said, "I knew you were going to beat me, but I didn't think you were going to stomp me into the ground." He was a good sport. I was the party chairman for two years. In 1966, the state of Utah turned from a Democratic state to a Republican state. People say this has always been a Republican state. However, they were heavily Democratic all over. All of the counties were controlled by Democratic county commissioners. In Weber County, prior to that time, only one Republican had been elected to county office for 50 years. That was Sherriff Mac Wade. This county was so strongly Democrat that a Republican may as well not even get on the ballot. We turned that around in 1966 and won control of the legislature, both the House and the Senate, by a vast majority. I think there were only five Democrats in the Senate when we got to it. There were only ten in the House. In fact, we elected too many. It was a bad deal to have that many Republicans and 28 so little opposition. That gradually faded out. That was one of the most exciting elections of my life because it was such a wonderful victory. I was re-elected party chairman in 1968. I had a good record and got a call from the Republican National Committee in Washington. The chairman of the Republican National Committee asked me if I'd come back and interview for a job working for the National Committee. I went back and I remember the feeling. I got out of my hotel and got that stinky, humid Washington air and I said to myself, "Dick, what in the hell are you doing here? Turn around and go home." I went to the interview with the deputy chairman and the chairman of the committee at that time, Rogers Morton. They offered me a job and I took it. I became the head of party development. After I did that for a while, I was promoted to the political director of the National Committee. I brought my family back and we lived in Maryland. We also lived in Virginia down by the Pentagon and had some nice experiences. We went to the grave site ceremony of John Kennedy when he was taken to Arlington National Cemetery. Later, at the top of the cemetery, they put a forever memorial for John Kennedy. Laurence and the other congressman from Utah, Sherm Lloyd, were there. Somehow or another we got on the parade route out to the cemetery. The soldiers and the Marines were lined up all the way and we had no way to get off. Laurence was joking and said, "Don't throw out any beer cans." We went up past the soldiers and when we got to the cemetery, the guy that was in charge told us we had to leave. We didn't want to after all that effort, so we sneaked into the press section and got kicked out of the press section too. We 29 went up the road and nobody paid attention to us there, but everybody including the Kennedys came up that road. The Carsons and the Kennedys were there. The Emperor of Ethiopia and Charles Degall came in. We were almost within touching distance of each of them. It was really kind of interesting to see that. In part of the ceremony they had the Irish Guard do a drill procedure and when they were through they marched out. As they marched out me and this kid marched in where they had been and we ended up right in front of the congressman. Laurence Burton said, "Hey Dick, look who's standing behind you." I looked behind me and there was Adlai Stevenson, who was the ambassador, and all these big-shots. We stood directly across from the grave site where the Kennedy casket was standing. The Kennedys were all on the other side. I was not even 20 feet away from Jacqueline Kennedy and her kids when all of this happened. In fact, we had a chance to walk by the casket. That was a good experience. Then, of course, Lyndon Johnson became the president and in 1964 he forced the passage of the Civil Rights Act that Kennedy could not get done. Kennedy didn't have the horsepower in the Senate to get it done. The House passed it, that wasn't a big problem, but it was the Senate that didn't want to pass it. They filibustered and did everything they could to avoid passing it. Lyndon Johnson just beat them up and on the 4th of July, they passed the Civil Rights Act. ROH: What was that like living in Washington when that happened? 30 RR: That was an exciting time. They had Martin Luther King Jr. speak at the Lincoln Memorial. There were hundreds of thousands of people there. I was at the Capitol and we talked about going down, but we figured it wasn't a good thing to do to go clear down there and get involved in that crowd. We were also there at the time the Blacks rioted on 14th street and burned a lot of the buildings. That was pretty close to the same time Martin Luther King Jr. gave his historic speech at the Lincoln Memorial. That was a big event at that time. It was an exciting time and an exciting point in history. ROH: Do you remember having conversations with your family about those events in the evenings when you were home with them? RR: My kids went with me when we saw the Kennedy ceremony. I explained that to them and when we got home and they were excited about it. They liked John Kennedy, they though he was a wonderful fellow. They got to do things that other kids don't get to do. They got to go to the White House, the Capitol building, Williamsburg and Jamestown. We went down to Jamestown and that was one of the great experiences where we saw replicas of those three little boats that brought the pilgrims here in 1607 and built the first permanent settlement in America. They gave us the history about how most of them starved to death or were killed by the Indians or by something else. There were very few survivors. That was a real eye-opener to us about early history. We got up to the Baltimore Harbor where Frances Scott Key saw the Star Spangled Banner and we saw the battlefield of the fight between the British and 31 the Americans on the Potomac River. Of course, the British captured Washington and they burned down a lot of things. They tried to burn down the White House and burned down a lot of it. They torched the various places in the Capitol and you can still see where the smoke was where they had gone with their torches. That was a great experience for my kids. They all became far more interested in American government. ROH: You've written a lot about your time in Washington in your book, so I won't repeat a lot of that, but tell me a little bit about how you felt about your career at that time. You had some significant leaps and bounds from Ogden to Washington at that point. RR: Reagan was anticipated to be a candidate for president in 1968. The convention was held in Miami Beach and Nixon, George Romney, and Rockefeller were candidates. Nixon was the clear leader. I was the state party chairman at that time. I knew the Nixon people and they knew me. They talked to me many times about helping on the Nixon campaign and I said, "Well, I'm the chairman of the party so I can't do that." We invited Ronald Reagan to come to our convention and the Nixon people were just livid after Reagan spoke. We only had about 14 national delegates at that time. This was the year we picked our delegates to go to the national convention. Nixon was clearly the favorite, although George Romney had some friends here because of his Mormon ties and ties to Utah. A guy from Cutbank, Montana who was a close associate of Reagan and a guy I knew as a party chairman said, "Dick, how would you like to have Ronald 32 Reagan be the keynote speaker at your convention, he'll do it for free." I said, "Hey, great. We want him." He came and Annette and I met him in the old Hotel Utah the night before he spoke. That was the first time we met Ronald Reagan. Annette was enamored because he was a movie star, and I was enamored because he was a politician. Anyway, he spoke the next day and he just mesmerized our delegation. Every one of them would have turned around and voted for him against Nixon if he ended up being our candidate. As we got down to Miami Beach, Nixon was nominated and Reagan withdrew his name, but George Romney stayed in and I was given the opportunity to second the nomination of George Romney for president back in Miami Beach. That was a high point for me. Nixon won of course. After he won the convention delegates, they hired me to do some ground work as a field man for Nixon in about 8 Western Rocky Mountain states. I had Washington, Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana and Arizona. I organized the ground campaign and it is interesting because the thing that attracted me to the National Party Leaders to begin with was my organizational technique for recruiting people to go door-to-door. We called it the neighbors program. I was called back to New York after Nixon was nominated to meet with John Mitchell who was in charge of the campaign. They asked me about this program that I had in mind and Mitchell liked it, but some of his aides didn't like it and they started to argue with me. Mitchell sat there and just smoked his pipe and never said a word during my presentation. When it was all done, they started asking, "How do you know this is going to work?" I said, "We've done 33 it, we know how this thing works, you don't have to worry about that." Mitchell said, "We're going to do it. I like it. Richards, we'd like you to come to work full-time for us." I said, "I can't do it because I'm the party chairman out in Utah, but I know somebody who can do that program for you." They wanted to do it in Oregon first and he was running a primary against Rockefeller. Oregon was a liberal state and Nixon's people said, "We're not even going to go there, it's just a waste of time." So they didn't go there, but they sent my friend Alan Peterson, who was the guy that I recommended to do this. Peterson was an intern to me when I was party chairman in Utah. He knew my program, so they hired him to run the program and Nixon won. Nixon had never been there and Rockefeller had been there three times. Rockefeller's slogan was, "He cared enough to come." Everybody expected Rockefeller to win, but Nixon did win. Nixon said, "That's my secret weapon. I want to do that." Peterson was hired to run this program all over the country and did a great job with it. After the Nixon campaign, the next effort I got involved with was when Ronald Reagan was running against Gerald Ford. Nixon left, Ford became the president and Ford wanted to run. These same people that brought me back to Washington all thought I would be for Ford and wanted me to be involved in his Ford campaign. They asked me to get involved and I said, "I can't do that. I'm for the other guy." They said, "You're for Ronald Reagan? You can't be against the seated president. You're a party chairman and you're against our incumbent president?" In fact, the owner of Zion's Bank in the state of Utah, Roy Simmons, 34 met me at the airport and said, "Dick, that's crazy. You're going to go for that "class B" act against the president." ROH: Why was that? Why were you so pro-Reagan? RR: I just really liked the guy. I saw something in him and I thought, "This is the guy that ought to be the president." Reagan and Ford contended against each other at the convention in 1976 and it was a very close battle. We lost it right at the last minute and we felt bad about that. Prior to the time that I went to work with him Ronald Reagan had a group called Citizens for the Republic. This was a political action committee that was not for his benefit but where he could raise money and give to conservative candidates. Paul Laxalt was Reagan's closest friend in Washington, the former governor of Nevada and the Senator at that time. He invited me to join the Citizens for the Republic. I got a letter from Ronald Reagan saying, "I understand you're willing to do this, I'd love to have you join us." I became a member of the executive committee for the Citizens for the Republic. After we lost to Ford, we held a couple of monthly meetings and the meetings were usually held in Florida or someplace a distance from me and I had to fly over there and I had to pay a hotel bill. It cost me money to do it, about a thousand bucks every time I went to one of the meetings. After I went to a couple of them I thought, "This is a big waste of time." I got up in a meeting Paul Laxalt was conducting and said, "You know the next battle we're going to have is a convention fight just like the one we just lost and I don't see us getting any better prepared than we were then. I think we're wasting time." Ronald Reagan was 35 sitting at the far end of the table and he was doodling. After I said that he stopped and said, "That's right," and he pointed the pen at me. Paul said, "Well, does anybody else have anything to say?" We said, "No." No one else was going to interfere after the president said that. He said, "Okay, Dick, I'm appointing you to form a committee to come back to the next meeting and tell us what we ought to be doing. Richard, you're the chairman of the committee." We held some meetings after that and came back to the next meeting and gave him a report on what I thought we ought to be doing. We put together a program and I presented it. Everybody at the meeting thought it was a great idea except for two people. One of them was John Sears, who later became the chairman of the Reagan campaign. The chairman was fired at the night of the New Hampshire primary. The other guy was a fellow that had been with Reagan for many years named Nofziger. They all said, "Hey, this is great we want to do it. So after the meeting was over, I headed home and Paul Laxalt remained there for a while with this guy from Cutbank, Montana and Paul said, "I like Dick's idea, but who's going to get to run it? The program entails some work." Frank said, "Well, why don't you ask Dick?" Paul said, "He's a lawyer, he doesn't have time to do this and we don't have money to pay him to get it done. That's a lot of time involved." Frank said, "Well, before you write him off, ask him." So Paul called me on the phone and asked, "Would you run this program that you proposed to us? We will pay all of your expenses and enough money to pay your overhead of your office while you're gone working for us, but we don't have the money to pay you for your time." I said, "Okay." 36 I spent several months doing that and after Reagan got nominated and he was going to do the campaign, he said, "Dick, we want you to run the Western half of the country." Dick Wirthlin was put in charge of it and Bill Casing was the chairman. Dick Wirthlin was the strategist and would say, "We want you to take everything West of the Mississippi River except Texas and build the ground organization." After we won, Reagan wanted me to be the chairman of the transition team for the Department of Interior. I headed the team where we transitioned the Department of Interior from the Democrats to the Republicans and that was an interesting experience because they were paranoid about us and we were paranoid about them. It was common courtesy for the outgoing administration to cooperate with the incoming and let them have whatever information they wanted. So, we went down to the Department of interior, I recruited a group of guys to work with me on the campaign. Paul Laxalt had a couple people he wanted to do that and we took over down at the Department of Interior. We decided what we wanted to do, what people we wanted to remove and what changes we wanted to make. During that time, there were a lot of rumors in the paper about what was going to happen to Dick Richards. You saw them in Ogden. Is he going to be Secretary of the Interior? Is he going to be chairman of the party? When we got through with the Department of Interior, I got a call from the White house and they asked, "Dick, will you be available at 5:00 p.m. to take a call from the White House?" I said, "I'll be here." At 5:00 p.m., I get a telephone call from Ronald Reagan and he said, "Hi Dick, this is Ron, you've been reading about rumors that I was going to 37 appoint you chairman of the National Committee, so I want to make those rumors a reality. Would you take that chairmanship for me?" I said, "Mr. President, I'd be glad to." That's how it happened. ROH: It was that simple. RR: That simple. That's the way Reagan was, he was straight forward and simple. Let me tell you a thing I learned. This is a little out of order, but it shows Reagan. After I was elected, I was invited to go to the meetings that took place once a month between the president and the leaders of the House and the Senate. Bob Michael was a minority leader of the House. He was from Peoria, Illinois. One time, as we walked into the meeting, President Reagan says, "Hi Bob, how are things in Peoria?" Bob says, "Shucks, Mr. President, we've got it tough. We've got 5,600 caterpillar workers unemployed. We're trying to get a contract to sell our ditch-digger to the Russians and we just can't get it done." The president said, "Well, what's the matter? Is that a piece of high-tech equipment or something?" He says, "Hell no, it's a ditch digger, anybody can make a ditch digger." The president said, "Then I don't understand." He said, "Well, we have to get permission from the Department of Commerce in order to make the sale and they haven't made a decision." The president walks over and put his hand on his shoulder and said, "Bob, they just did." That day, Bob announced to his people in Peoria that the President approved their sale and they all went back to work. That's the way Reagan did it. I would have thought that he would have said to his Chief of Staff, Jim Baker to call Secretary Mossbacker and see what's holding 38 this up. Well, he didn't need to do that, he was president he could make the decision. ROH: Today is Wednesday, September 5, 2012. We are in the home of Richard Richards continuing his oral history. This is Rebecca Ory Hernandez from Weber State University. Present are Rebecca and Richard Richards as well as Annette Richards. Why don't we pick up from when you were still in Washington D.C. and you've finished your political piece of working with the White House? Tell me what you did after that presidential term was completed. RR: After I completed my two year assignment at the Republican National Committee, I chose not to run longer because there were too many problems fighting with people that wanted to control the National Committee and all that stuff. As I left, Ronald Reagan called me down to the White House and said, "Dick, you've been a loyal lieutenant to me for a long time, but you've never really been in my administration. I would like you to come and be part of the Reagan administration. What I'd like you to do is go over to the Department of Interior and be the Under Secretary to Jim Watt. Jim is having trouble and I think you could help him out. I said, "Well, Mr. President, I've been a volunteer for you for about six years and I'm broke. I need to get out and make some money. So, I really don't think I can do that." Not only that, I was beginning to have some health problems and I knew that it would be a torture chamber to go through some kind of hearing with the Senate controlled by the Democrats. I could not imagine that the Democrats would approve someone who had just been chairman of the Republican Party to go be the Under Secretary of the Department of Interior. I 39 passed that up and I opened up a lobbying lawyer business in Washington and began representing various interests. ROH: What was the name of the company? RR: Initially, I was with a couple of other lawyers, but when I started my own company it was called, "Commerce Consultants International" (CCI). When I left the National Committee, I had a going away party sponsored by the National Committee. It was to introduce my replacement, but also it was sort of a going away party for me and Ronald Reagan came. I heard from some inside people that some of the folks at the White House said, "Don't go for Richards, you didn't go when Dick Allen left or when others left. Why go for him?" Reagan said, "Well, I like him and we'll go." So, Reagan came and he spoke and said, "Dick Richards was my friend when it took courage to be my friend." That refers to the fact that I was the only state party chairman that supported Reagan against Gerald Ford while Ford was the president. That set me apart from the others and that's why Reagan appreciated me. It took courage to do that. I opened my office and immediately got some clients. One of the first clients was Sikorsky Helicopter Company. They had been trying to sell their helicopter to Taiwan for about six years. At one time they had a deal, but when Jimmy Carter was president he killed it. I met with a representative who was a lobbyist for Sikorsky and also a General from Taiwan. He came to my office and said, 'We want to buy the Black Hawk, and if we can't get it in the next six months we're going to write it off and we're going to buy the French helicopter 40 called the Augusta. We'll give you six months to get this done." I contacted Ed Meece who was counselor to the president and told him what we wanted to do. He went to the president and the president said, "Let them have what they want." That was six years of red tape cut by the president. I became a hero to Sikorsky because they'd been trying for six years. I developed a pretty good base of aerospace clients. I represented Sikorsky and I did some work for Boeing, General Dynamics and Pratt Whitney jet engines. I did a lot of work for them over many years. It turned out to be a very good client. ROH: Were there any other major clients when you were working? RR: I had some interesting ones. I was asked to represent the Kingdom of Thailand. I was the foreign agent for Thailand here in the United States. The United States was pressing some trade violations against Thailand. They were copying some of our medications. I remember they had a fake Sudafed that they sold and they copied our movies and all kinds of stuff. They stole a lot of intellectual property. The United States was going to punish them for it. When I was representing them, I talked to the Prime Minister and saw the other people that were movers and shakers over there and I asked, "What's your deal?" They said, "We'll stop stealing in two years, but we've got to do that now because the American products like medications are too expensive for Thai people to buy so we have to copy them and sell them at a lower price. We'll stop in two years." I asked, "Why?" They said, "Because we're working on our own copyright and patent laws and when they're in place to protect us then we'll protect you, but we're not going to protect you until we're ready." I went to the White House and I talked to the 41 domestic advisor of the president who was a friend of mine, Roger Porter. I said, "They said they'll quit in two years." He started to laugh and he says, "How am I going to tell the president they're only going to steal for two years?" I said, "Well, you know, the Japanese lied to you, the Chinese lied to you, everyone else lies to you, but these guys are at least telling you the truth." They withheld the sanctions against them. I represented this fellow by the name of Chachi. He was the first elected Prime Minister and after a couple years he got on an airplane with one of his generals by the name of Suchinda. The general pulled out his pistol and said, "Okay, Mr. Prime Minister, you're out and I'm in." He took over and executed Chachi right there with the airplane. Later on, Suchinda was trying to establish himself there and a lot of students rioted and picketed and so forth. About 1,500 of them just disappeared. I guess he had them killed and removed. When the king found out what happened he told him, "You're out. You can't be the prime minister here." Suchinda walked away. The king had a great deal of moral influence, although he had no legislative or statutory right to make those decisions. That was an interesting experiment. ROH: Did you ever have to travel to Thailand? RR: I traveled to Thailand once in a while, but my area was mostly in the Far East. I did a lot of traveling. In fact, someone asked me about traveling to Hong Kong and I looked it up and found I had 22 round-trips to Hong Kong in the 10 years of my passport. I did a lot there. 42 ROH: What about in Bangkok? RR: I did a lot in Bangkok. Later on, I represented a company in California called Sunrider International. I went to Bangkok, Malaysia, Indonesia and other countries to get permission for Sunrider to sell their product there and to convince them that our method of selling was legitimate. It was multi-level marketing and that was not common in the Far East, so we had to talk them into letting us do that. ROH: What happened next in your career? RR: That went on for several years. I represented people during the George Bush administration and did some part-time volunteer work for George Herbert Walker Bush in his campaign. I did some organizing in neighborhoods and in Washington, Oregon and here in the West. In fact, I was telling Annette that while I was involved with George Bush, he invited me to fly out with him to Boeing in Seattle. They were honoring the astronauts. They had the living astronauts there and I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to who was there, I never took any pictures or anything because I was there on a political trip. I think about a half a dozen of those guys and Neil Armstrong was there. They were given an award by Boeing Company for their exploits. They had an airplane like the one George Bush flew when he crashed into the ocean and he was rescued. He was really excited about that. He was looking at that and reminiscing. I was talking to Barbara Bush while he was doing that and she was excited for him because he hadn't seen one of those airplanes for a really long time. 43 ROH: Did you do any lobbying after that? RR: I did lobbying almost up to the time that I came home to Utah. Having been the Republican National Chairman, I had excellent contacts with Republicans and the Republican presidents. After Bill Clinton got elected, most of my contacts were gone. They were now Democratic contacts, so I figured that was a good time for me to go home. ROH: What year was it that you came home? RR: I think I came home about 1993. We were looking for a place to live here. I had a nice home in Washington and the value of it increased significantly. I had a profit on that property, but the tax laws were such at that time that if I sold my house, even though I bought another house I didn't get any kind of tax break on it and the government would have taken about $70,000 from me in taxes. I said, "Well, I'm not going to do that. I'll put the money into a new house." I bought a house here in South Ogden. I bought it without Annette seeing it. I came out and I saw this house and I walked in and it was a beautiful house on 46th and Jefferson, a big gray rock house. I walked in there and the neighbor was a real estate agent for Weber County. I walked in and looked in the foyer and I didn't even go through the house, it was just so beautiful and I was impressed so I said, "I'll take it." I gave him a check that night for earnest money. I said, "One condition, my wife has a week to decide whether she wants to come here." I called Annette and she didn't want to be bothered coming out. My daughter who lived here went to see it and she said, "Oh mom, you'll love the house." We agreed and we moved 44 into the house. We lived there until I started having a pretty serious heart problem and we couldn't keep up the land. The property was too big and complicated. We had to move, so we moved here into the condominiums. ROH: Tell me a little bit about your health problems you are referring to. RR: When I was living in Virginia I went out for a bike ride with my youngest son. As I pumped up a hill I had severe chest pains and I stopped at the top and I said, "Brian, I have to stop and rest." He wanted to go on so I told him he can go on but I had to rest. When I went home Annette saw me and she said, "Dick you look terrible, you need to go to a doctor." I said, "Well, I'll do it tomorrow." I was kind of gray and having a lot of pain. I waited until the next day and went to a doctor. They examined me and said, "You've had a major blockage of your arteries, but don't worry about it because the worst that could happen to you already happened." We thought that was pretty crazy to say that, so I went to a very famous cardiologist I had contact with as a result of some of my business. He ran a heart hospital in Phoenix. They tested me and said, "You've got some blockage." They gave me an angiogram and put in a stent. The stent lasted just one day and it was clogged up again. This was just a couple of days before Christmas. I said to the surgeon, "What do you recommend?" He said, "I think you ought to get a mechanical fix." He meant a bypass. I said, "Well, I ought to do it. This is a good time for me to do that. Business is slow in Washington. So when can you do it?" He said, "I can do it 45 tomorrow." I called Annette and said, "I'm not coming home for Christmas, I'm getting open-heart surgery tomorrow." Annette had Christmas in Virginia with the family before she came to see me. I remember after the operation when I looked in the mirror; I looked like my father looked on his death bed. My voice was just like him. Annette saw me and she started crying. That was my first open-heart surgery. I got over that for a while and later on I developed another problem. In fact, I'd been in Korea and worked out in the exercise room in the hotel in Korea and I thought, "I'm doing great." By the time I got to the airport I was having trouble, so that was the sign that I needed it again. Then, I ended up having open-heart surgery again here in Ogden with Dr. Cain at the McKay-Dee Hospital. That one was kind of interesting because I went to Salt Lake to the Beehive House and I was participating in a political meeting there. The pains became more severe and more severe. I didn't think I was going to make it home it was so bad. Immediately, I saw a sign that said "Hospital Next Right" so I took the road up to the hospital on Antelope Drive and went to the emergency ward and went in and told the lady, "I need some help." She said, "You look terrible. Sit down." They got me in a wheelchair and got me some oxygen and said, "You need to see your heart doctor tomorrow." I went to see him and that's when he said, "We'll do another operation on you." So I got another open-heart surgery here. The one I got in Phoenix I got about five or six bypasses. When I was here in Ogden I got a couple more. It seemed like every two years I would have problems. 46 Later on, I had a problem again and I saw the same doctors and they said, "We won't open you up, we've opened you up twice and we're not interested in performing another open-heart, we never know what we're going to get into." I was in serious trouble and nobody would touch me. I went to the LDS hospital in Salt Lake and they didn't want to do anything and McKay-Dee didn't want to do anything. My son got on the internet and found a vascular surgeon out in Daly City, California who was doing some experimental laser surgery. We decided to try that. I went out to see them and they acknowledged that I needed some surgery, but it was experimental and the FDA would not let them perform that surgery unless I had an independent doctor look at me beforehand to say, "If he doesn't get it he'll probably die." It was one of these compassionate things. They said, "There's no insurance, so if you come out here, you'll have to bring cash with you." The vascular surgeon's secretary or nurse negotiated with the hospital and everybody involved and I had to take $15,000 out to Daly City Hospital and they performed that surgery on me. It's called TMR Transmyocardial Revascularization. They open you up and pull the ribs apart and punch holes in your heart with a laser. They move the laser right up to the heart muscle and punch a hole and blood will start coming out and they rub their finger on it and it seals it over and they move over and punch another until they punch 25 holes, sew you up and that's it. I'll tell you, it was the best operation I've ever had. The impact was dramatic. I walked out of there in a couple of days and the only thing that was wrong with me was I hurt a 47 lot on the soft tissue. Otherwise, it was like I'd never had a heart problem. That lasted me for several years and we decided I could go on a mission. Annette and I volunteered to go on a mission and we were called to the Rochester, New York mission and that included Buffalo, Rochester and Palmyra. While I was there I had the problem again and I was hospitalized. When I got home everything looked pretty good. I ended up over here at Ogden Regional and had a few more stents put in. I got to a point where I was really in trouble and my doctor said, "I tried to go in there and put in another stent, but I couldn't even get my wire in the artery. I tried four times and then I gave it up. I have to tell you, you're in pretty serious shape. I don't think you'll live on too much. I'd give you about two months unless somebody can fix this and we don't have a doctor with the ability to fix this particular problem." It was the main descending right artery. ROH: What year was this? RR: It was about 2007. The doctor said, "Let me call Mayo, Johns Hopkins and Cleveland. If anybody could do it one of them can, but I don't even know if they'll touch you." Cleveland said, "Come on back and we'll look at it and decide what to do." So we went back there and we checked in on a Monday and they did all kinds of tests on me until Friday and I met with the surgeon and he said, "Mr. Richards, you're in pretty bad shape. You've got about two months and that's about all you can live with this. The only way we could avoid that is if we could fix it. We don't even want to try. We don't open up people three times, now you want 48 us to open you up the fourth time. We don't normally do that." I said, "Well, doctor, you're the best hospital in the country to do this, you're the best doctor and I'm a tough patient. I want you to do it." He started laughing and he said, "I guess if anybody can survive it, you probably could. I won't agree to do it, but stick around for a day or so and I'll talk to some other surgeons and we'll see if we can work something out. But you have no promise from me." On Sunday, we got the telephone call from them and they said, "If you're still willing to take the risk and give appropriate releases, we'll do it on Tuesday." They called back and said, "We've got a cancellation Monday, come on in Monday morning." So I went in Monday morning and that's when they did the operation on me. It was kind of interesting though, the doctor did not want to do it. I knew he didn't want to do it, so he was looking pretty glum when they were about to do it. They did twelve open-heart surgeries a day at that hospital. He looked kind of glum and I said, "Well, doctor, let me tell you something that will make you feel better. I'm a Mormon, and we have a scripture that says all men are given a gift and you have a gift to heal people and I have the gift to be healed." He gave me the thumbs up and shoved me in the operating room and that was it. He called my doctor here and said, "You know, if it hadn't been for his attitude, we would have never touched him. He had such a good attitude. We thought he had a reasonable chance to survive." After about a year my doctor said, "Write to this guy and tell him you're still alive, I think he'll be interested in hearing it." ROH: It's been five years later. Are you doing well now? 49 RR: I'm doing pretty well. I've got some problems, but I'm doing pretty well. ROH: So does this heart issue run in your family? RR: Both of my parents had strokes, so I presume it runs in the family. I've got seven sisters and none of them have the problem. I have one brother and he's had one little problem, but hasn't had a stent put in. I've ended up with nine bypasses, four open-heart surgeries, fourteen stents, and a pacemaker and I'm just ticking along until it's time to go. ROH: Were there any prominent surgeons here in Ogden that worked with you on this? RR: Doctor Cain at McKay-Dee Hospital and my cardiologist here is Doctor Diehl at Ogden Regional. He's put in about seven of my stents. He's not a surgeon, he's a cardiologist. So, that's my medical history. ROH: Let's back up here a little bit. You moved back here from Washington. Were you involved in law practice when you moved back to Ogden? RR: I still represented Sunrider Corporation out of California. I was their general council. I really wasn't though. I had the title, but I was more of a consultant to them and did routine corporate work for them. I did a little bit of other lobbying. I did not do legal work, but I did some lobbying for people. ROH: Were you lobbying for Utah constituents or people back in Washington? RR: Mostly back in Washington. 50 ROH: Can you tell me some of the people you were working with then? RR: I was working with people in the aerospace business and I had to lobby the congress for them to put a little pressure on Taiwan to buy a bunch of Boeing aircraft. Taiwan Airlines wanted it, but they had some guys in the Taiwan government that didn't want to spend the money although they had billions on hand. Our job was to build a little bit of fire under the head of the government in Taiwan so they'd buy the airplanes from us. We had a bad balance of trade. They sold us a lot more than we sold them. To sell them eight or ten 747's was a big deal and we promoted that pretty aggressively. I didn't do a whole lot more, I really was quite retired. ROH: Did you get involved with any groups in the community? RR: I got involved with some friends and we played golf once a week. I did a little work in politics. I helped Orrin Hatch and other Republican candidates. I didn't do a lot. I didn't have the energy to do a lot and I didn't feel safe to travel. I did do some traveling to visit my son in Alabama and my daughter in New York and stuff like that, but I've been retired. However, I'm writing some papers on how I think we can improve the presidential election system in America. ROH: I know you have written a lot. RR: I've had people ask me to represent them and I've turned them down because I couldn't be reliable. If I had to go someplace tomorrow at 10:00, I'm not sure I could do it because of my health. I wake up some mornings and I just can't operate. 51 ROH: I know about you're involvement with Weber State and you've indicated that you guest lecture at the University of Utah. Why don't you tell me a little bit about that? RR: My interest was primarily with Weber State. When I left Washington after having seen the legal profession and the lobbyist I thought, "We have a real problem with ethics in this country." I wanted to do something about ethics and I talked to Ann Milner who was president of the university. I embarrassed my wife in what I said, but I said, "Ann, you ought to teach ethics on the campus. If you do that, you'll be a hero and if you don't do it you'll be a bum." She said, "You mean I'll be a bum?" I said, "Yes." We laughed about that. We talked about ethics and the development people got in touch with me. He said, "If you want to do something about it, why don't you put up some money to start a foundation?" So I did. I put up quite a bit of money for it. We started our ethics program and what we've been doing is giving scholarships out. For the last couple of years we've given scholarships and I think last year we gave about $20,000. That is, $1,000 scholarships to 20 people. ROH: Tell me a little bit about who is receiving the scholarships. RR: We put on a program in conjunction with Garff Motors, who has a program for high school students. We decided to have each of the high schools in the area participate in a contest to write the best essay on how we can improve ethics in our community. The people who wrote the best essay in 20 high schools were given a $1,000 scholarship to Weber State. We've done that for two years and I 52 presume we will continue to do it. In the meantime, I decided to write a book. I started writing my book about what I had done and so on and I've got some good help from Gene Sessions up on the campus. It took me a long time. Writing a book is not an easy project. My wife had a lot of good notes. My secretary kept a lot of good notes. I had a lot of press releases. A lot of what I put in there I got from newspapers because most everything I did was written up in the press somewhere. The book is called, "Climbing the Political Ladder One Rung at a Time" That was designed primarily to encourage young people who like politics to get involved. Also, to tell them how I was able to go from nowhere to the National Chairmanship and that they can do the same thing. As I give talks around, one of the first questions everybody asks is, "How did you ever get to become the Republican National Chairman?" The press says, "He came from Podunk Utah. Where's Ogden?" They had no idea where Ogden was. I had no family that was previously involved in politics. My family didn't have money, so how did I get to be National Chairman? ROH: Do you think that in today's environment that something like that could happen to someone? RR: It would be pretty rare because I've never heard of it happening before either. ROH: I'm sure that's what a lot of the students say is that it's really remarkable. RR: Well, what I tell them is that if they are willing to do the grubby, unglamorous work like licking the envelopes, putting on the stamps and running the errands, 53 you can work yourself up that ladder. Candidates love volunteers and if you're a good volunteer, you will just keep progressing up the line. The guy that I hired to be the executive director of the party here when I was the national chairman was Dave Turner, a young kid out of Utah State that volunteered to drive a car for me when I was a candidate. He was just a young kid interested in politics and he was a driver. From there he just moved up the ladder until he ended up in a pretty good position. ROH: What is he doing now? RR: He worked for Hudd for a while and he's just trying to get some years in for government service and he's working for the national security people at the airport. ROH: Back to this ethics business. It's curious to me because I don't know of a lot of ethics programs at other schools, so what inspired you to create something related to ethics at Weber State? RR: Well, because we needed it. We really need it. When I talked to them, Ann said, "Talk to the head of the business department." I talked to him and he said, "Well, we devote an hour or two in the course of study on ethics." I said, "That's nothing. We ought to have a whole program of ethics." I really pushed it hard and Nathan Clark pushed me to put up the money to start it and that's what we've done. Every day you can read in the newspaper about some major breech of ethics on the part of a governor, a senator, or someone that works for the city— everybody. There's ethical breech all around us and a lot of times these kids 54 don't know any better. I've seen surveys where they ask kids if they have ever cheated in school. Seventy-five percent of them say they've cheated and when you ask why they say, "Well, everybody else is cheating and I'm competing with them. If I have to compete with them then I guess I have to cheat." I thought, "We need to start teaching them a little bit earlier." If we can get a hold of these kids in high school and get them involved in ethics, it's going to a make a difference. Someone asked me, "How are you going to measure success?" I said, "I don't know that you can, but somewhere along the line you're going to touch somebody and that's going to improve their attitude on ethics." That's what it's all about. It's a difficult thing. It's prodding all the time and trying to get people to buy scholarships for the kids, but we have had some experience from these young kids that won the scholarship that say, "I could not have gone to college without that scholarship. That made all the difference in the world to me." We give it to them not because they are rich or good students, but because they have the best ideas about ethics. I still spend a lot of time and effort on this ethics stuff. ROH: I think that's great. RR: However, I do have a complaint against the university on this and I've talked to a lot of these guys that raise big chunks of money. I say, "Why don't you tell the people that are giving to earmark some of that money for ethics?" The university doesn't want to do it because they want the money to go into the building or whatever they do. There's no reason why we can't tell a guy that's going to give a million dollars that $50,000 of that can go into ethics, but the university has their 55 own program and it isn't channeling the ethics program. We're getting the new president soon and I'm going to be approaching him. Ann has been supportive, but nothing has happened other than holding those meetings. We had the former governor speak to our group a year ago and we gave out all these scholarships and there wasn't one word in the press about it. Standard Examiner never wrote one word about it. We had the pictures taken of all these kids that got scholarships and we were hoping they'd get their picture in the paper and they did not. I called Doug at the Standard and I asked if he would run a story on the ethics program. He said, "Yes. When is it?" I said, "It was last night." They did not even know what night it was and I said, "You guys at the university and the public relations department failed, you should have seen that the press was there." Again, this is the second year they didn't do it. We've decided that we've got to have a public relations guy on our board. It's their job to get the press. ROH: Is there anything nationally that you're aware of happening with ethics? RR: No. It was kind of interesting when Jon Huntsman was the governor, he came up when they named the Richard Richards Institute. Governor Huntsman and Jake Garn were there and they named it. Huntsman said, "You're the only university around here that's promoting ethics. I'm going to support you. I'm going to help you." Well, he hasn't. I sent him an email when he was over in China and said, "You said you wanted to help us I thought it meant you were going to give us some money or get other people to give some money." We hate to have to go out 56 and grub money a dollar at a time to give these scholarships. Zion's Bank has been a big supporter. They have given us $12,000 each year for two years. That was very helpful to us. The university has paid for the meals when we have the banquet and that's about all the university has done. It really hasn't caught on yet. ROH: It takes some time. How many years has it been now? RR: I've been working on it for about three or four years, but we've been giving out scholarships for the last two. Alan Hall is a big money raiser for the school. I went to Alan and said, "Alan, why don't you tell these guys that are giving money that they can earmark some for ethics." He said he would do it, but I don't think he has. However, in the next week or so that committee meets again and I'm going to go back to Alan Hall and say, "Look, give us some money." In fact, because he writes this business article and I told him, "Alan, why don't you write an article about ethics?" He wrote a paragraph about it out of probably 30 or 40 columns. We got two inches referring to ethics. We're going to have to press it. ROH: I think it would be good for you to write a column too because you've got more experience. RR: I've written some columns only they've been political columns. ROH: What do you think about ethics in politics these days? RR: Well, politics today is meaner than it has been in a long time. When Jake Garn decided he didn't want to run again and Howard Baker from Tennessee, the 57 senator from Colorado said, "It isn't fun anymore. It used to be fun, but it is just mean now. Your colleagues are mean, your constituents are mean, the press is mean and it just isn't fun." Senator Baker told me, "If I knew how good it was on the outside, I would have quit the senate a long time ago." It's just a bad environment and it is getting worse. You can go back in history and you can see even in George Washington's time they slandered one another, but we slander them day after day in the press that gets to millions of readers every day. That's why it appears so bad. ROH: How do you inspire the youth? Let's say these high school kids that you're helping to go to university. How do you inspire them to change when what they're seeing is so slanderous? RR: We've made a couple of attempts to do that. We were assigned by the governor to sit on the committee to tell how to improve elections in the state. I got the students up at Weber to write a program on it and we submitted it to the governor. We also got one on ethics and what the ethics reform ought to be. Our kids on the campus wrote a program on how to establish an ethics program in the state of Utah and the legislation didn't pay any attention to it. We gave it directly to the governor and we gave it to legislatures and we gave it to the press. Everybody saw it but the legislature pre-empted everybody and wrote their puny little ethics reform which is nothing. 58 ROH: I was wondering if that had anything to do with it. I remember hearing about ethics reform a little over a year ago, so I was wondering if that is just one of those things that will take more time. RR: Yes, it will take time beyond my time to get, but whatever we do to get it going is worth it. Like I said, if you ask, "How do you measure your success?" There are no definitive measures, but if you touch the heart and mind of a half a dozen kids, that's good. Out of our first year we had one of our students that got an ethics scholarship and they worked on our committee. They went to Washington to be an intern at the White House for Obama. Another one went to work for congressman Bishop. The kids did get involved and they're doing some stuff. I can pick out two or three kids that I know we've had an impact on and will do something in politics. As I look back, when I was party chairman in Utah, Karl Rove was one of my interns. I didn't even know him. I didn't pay attention to him at that time. Another one was this guy Dave Hanson, who runs Orrin Hatch's campaign and I had lunch with him yesterday. Another one named Alan Peterson who did a nationwide organizational program for Richard Nixon and we had some guys from Ogden participating. Alex Hurtado, he was one of my best political friends and he got involved in this national organization for Nixon. I've seen a handful of people that have become involved and have been very successful, but it's got to be more. ROH: Is there anything else you'd like to add about ethics? 59 RR: There is one thing that's happening. Isaac Goeckeritz is putting together a film on ethics to promote the ethics up here. He has interviewed Jake Garn, Richard Wirthlin, Mr. Mack, the governor, and a whole lot of people talking about ethics in their business. Bob Garff talks about the ethics of his father in the automobile business. They're talking about ethics and he's preparing it and his wife said he is coming close and maybe by Christmas he will have it done and it will go on the air at KUED. I think it will be good enough that it will open up a lot of other things. Another guy that's in that is Dan Jones and he talks about ethics in the polling business. ROH: That will be good to see. Isaac Goeckeritz, for future reference, is a local historian, film documenter, a Weber State graduate, and one of Richard's relatives. RR: We were involved with the one on the Union Station, he did the one on the hill out in Uintah, "The U," he did one on homeless vets and now he's doing one on ethics. He's also doing other stuff. KUED loves him, they say he's got a great deal of talent and they're going to keep using him. ROH: Today is September 26, 2012 and we are in the home of Dick Richards. Present are Rebecca Ory Hernandez and Dick Richards. We are going to continue your oral history. The last time we spoke we talked a lot about the Ethics Institute at Weber State, so today I would like to talk a little more about present day and what is happening in your life. What are your involvements here in Ogden and in 60 the state related to politics? I know that you have been a guest on a few T.V. shows, so why don't you tell me a little bit about that? RR: I was on two Ted Capner shows, that's the Sunday afternoon broadcast. The first one after he read my book he invited me to come and talk to him and we talked about the things that are in the book. You've seen many of them. The other discussion we had just a week or so ago was on how we can cut down the cost of presidential campaign. This year's presidential campaign will probably cost 4 billion dollars. Each one of the candidates will raise about a billion dollars for their campaign and the political parties will make another half a billion. Then, 527 committees, or so-called super-packs, will each raise about a half a billion or more and that will put us at least $4 billion for the presidential campaign. The point that people don't understand is that the Supreme Court has rules that anyone can get involved in a campaign and spend all the money they want provided they do not coordinate with the candidate. All these committees raise money and you know what their message is going to be, they don't have to say vote for Obama or vote for Romney, you can tell what they're promoting. They get involved in it and that will bring the cost to over $4 billion. My proposal was that in order to prevent this limit the time, since you can't limit the money. Reduce the time of the campaign and allow the candidates to do their exploratory effort up until about the 15th of April in the election year. By the 15th of April they have to announce whether they will or will not be a candidate. If they say they will be a candidate, from that day on they can start raising money. They'll have to go through the primaries of the various states from that time before November. 61 If you're in a state with a caucus convention like we have, you might have your first caucus about three months after the candidate announces. We'd have the county conventions and the state conventions and if you had to have a primary you'd push the campaign between the Republican and the Democrat clear back to about August of September. They can't raise or spend a billion dollars between September and November, so it will really force the whole process to slow down to eliminate cost. Romney had been running for about 6 or 8 years and Obama has been running for 3 and it's just boring, wasteful and non-productive. The conventions and the debates they have are really about nothing and they reduce themselves to just petty criticism of the other guy. If you had only a three month campaign period they'd talk about what they want to do. They'd talk about the positive aspects of their campaign. ROH: Who profits from all of this money? RR: I made that point on television. The only ones that profit are the television stations, the radio, the newspaper, the campaign managers, and the advertising firms. The public doesn't profit by it. It's the guys that make money out of the campaign. Professional fundraisers get a percentage of the money they raise, the television people get money for everything they run, the campaign managers and the public relations people get 15 percent of what they spend on television. Just imagine a $200 million campaign on television and the guy is going to make about $30 million for putting the ads on the air. That's a big deal. ROH: So the candidates don't actually make any of the money they are raising? 62 RR: No, the candidates don't get it. It's those that are in the campaign business that get the money. Nobody likes to give it, but when you've got a campaign and they keep hitting you up for money, you feel the pressure and you make contributions. Everybody but the guys that make money on the campaign would like to see it shorter. ROH: Do you think that will happen in our lifetime? RR: It could, but I don't know whether it will or not. There has been a drive in the past for regional primaries or a national primary. If we had regional primaries, that would help a lot because then the candidate would have to talk to all of the American people instead of just eight states. Where they are now they go to Illinois and they talk about automobile manufacturing because that's the big issue there. They go to Ohio and they talk about the agricultural subsidies. It really isn't a national campaign, it is a series of little local interest campaigns. That's not good for the country. ROH: Are there any other shows that you've been featured on other than the one that you just mentioned? RR: No, I've been on his show a couple of times and I speak once in a while at the Hinckley Institute. I get invited more to the University of Utah to speak than I do Weber State, but I do participate on the campuses and I've been asked to talk to civic groups in town. My health is such that I have been turning them down. I don't know whether or not I'm going to feel well enough to do it. I just say, "No, I don't do that anymore." 63 ROH: Are you doing any local speeches during this campaign? RR: I write down suggestions for the candidates to send to them and they never follow those. What happens is that when a guy gets to be the campaign manager doesn't want other people telling him what to do. They look at guys like me and say, "Oh those guys are over the hill, they don't know the campaigns are different today." They don't pay any attention to us. They're wrong. I found my way to the national chairmanship by doing a good campaign on the state and local level and then on the national level. The principles of running the program we run is the same today as it was 20, 30, or 50 years ago. The average American has nothing to do with the campaign. They don't know the candidate. They don't meet the candidates and they don't even know who they are. If you put on a program where you give them the opportunity to participate in the campaign they're flattered by it. They want to do it. What we had done over the years was recruit people. For Richard Nixon, we set up a telephone operation and called people in the various neighborhoods and said, "I'm a volunteer for Richard Nixon, we think he's uniquely qualified to be president of the United States. We're doing what we can, will you help us?" A lot of people say yes and ask what they can do. We send them brochures and ask them to go door-to-door and tell the people about Richard Nixon and give him their personal endorsement. We know it flatters people and they think their job is very important. 64 Many years ago, one guy up in Portland called up after we went through the primary and said, "I did my work in the primary, but I'm 82 years old and legally blind. I don't think I can do it in a general election. So, you better get someone to take my place." He thought that the little role he had in the neighborhood was so important that if he didn't do it, there would be a problem so we'd have to get somebody to take his place. T The campaign chairman doesn't make any money if you do this volunteer work and neither does the television or anyone else, this is a very quiet campaign. The only person that makes any money on this is the guy that rents you the building and maybe the telephone company that has telephones from it. ROH: That's interesting. Are you doing any other kinds of present day consulting? RR: No, I'm actually retired. I'm helping a couple of little businesses, but I'm basically retired. I'm one of the 47 percent that's living off of the government program called Social Security. ROH: Can you share a little bit about the businesses you're helping? RR: I've been helping a company that makes a gasoline additive that reduces the pollution of your automobile and increases your gas mileage. Interestingly enough, my role is to get government people to look at it and try it out. I have found that people that work for the government in the motor pools don't care if you save money on gasoline. It's not out of their pocket. You can give it to them and ask them to try it out, but they don't do it. We talk about the need to increase 65 mileage and reduce pollution, but the guy that's running the motor pool at the state of Utah, Salt Lake and Ogden don't care. ROH: Is it corn-based? RR: No, it's not a food-based. It's made of algae. It does not affect the corn prices or the wheat prices. I use it in my car and I get five more miles per gallon in the city and on the highway. ROH: That's fascinating. RR: It's just a little tablet you put in the gas tank. It looks like a jelly bean and when you fill your gas tank you drop it into the tank. ROH: Is it available on the market? RR: Yes, but it's only on the internet. You can't sell it at the gas stations because it cuts down their gas sales they don't want that. I've got to give my wife credit that she put up with all of the things I've done and all of the moving. I have dragged her and my kids around the country time and time again and they've never complained. I think they've had a great benefit from doing it, but at the same time a lot of people complain if they've had to pick up and move every year or two. We never lived in a house for more than 10 years until we were 13 years in that house in McLean, Virginia and that's the longest we've ever been in a house. AR: Actually, we've been here now about as long as we've been there. It wasn't easy, I'll tell you. 66 ROH: Annette, you do history, right? AR: Yes. I've been doing that. I went to a meeting in Salt Lake on this new family search and they asked how long people have been researching and I'd been researching the longest. Over 50 years. I started when I was pretty young. Our oldest daughter was three months old when I got involved. ROH: Okay. Thanks Annette. Let's talk a little about present day politics, just a couple of quick questions. Are you involved at all in present day politics as far as on the national level? RR: Once in a while a candidate will call me and ask if he can sit down with me for a while and talk about the campaign and I give him some ideas. Otherwise, I'm really not involved. I was called by the campaign chairman for Governor Rick Perry and asked if I would be the Utah chairman for Perry and I said, "We've got to get passed John Huntsman first." I couldn't work for Perry as long as John Huntsman was in the race, but if Huntsman was out I'd be glad to help Perry out. I think he was a good candidate except he can't talk and answer questions. ROH: Other than Perry, are there any other names? RR: Well, I gave a little bit of advice to Hatch's opponent, but I said, "Orrin is a good friend of mine. I can't tell you how to run against him, but I can tell you what I think the issues ought to be." I spent an hour with Dan Lillianquist and I thought he was a good candidate, but he ran a bad campaign. ROH: What makes a bad campaign? 67 RR: If the campaign doesn't connect with the public and the voters it's a bad campaign. What you've got to do is talk about a message that they want to hear about and you have to have a good point of view on it. That's what these polls are about. They're polling all the time, "How do you feel about immigration? How do you feel about this or that?" The candidate tailors their message to appeal to those people. Unfortunately, it gets to be just a pandering deal to them. I respect Jon Huntsman because he said, "I'm not going to go to Iowa because I'm against ethanol subsidies. If I got to Iowa they're just going to "boo" me and I won't make any headway there, so I'm not going to go pander to them." I respect him for taking that position. Most of the candidates will go to one place and pander to them and it's just not healthy for the country and I think it's too bad. I'm 80 years old and my health isn't good, so I deliberately took myself out of a lot of this. I did join the tea party and I'll tell you why I like it. Number one, this is middle class America, the silent majority starting to make a little bit of noise. They're not looking for something special for themselves; they just don't want things special given to everybody else. They say, "We've got to cut down our spending." It isn't a question of raising more money, it's spending less money. When they go out and they have a rally of 15,000 people, there's no paraphernalia on the ground or a mess. They don't create a problem. It's clean, it's nice and these are good American citizens voicing their opinion. I read where people say, "The tea party is fading and they are not going to be all that critical in the campaign." They're kidding themselves. The tea party is alive and well and they will be very active in the campaigns when it comes closer to election time. 68 They don't campaign all year long, but they will be out working and they will have an impact. ROH: I think it's interesting that today that we have a new party. I think most people would find that interesting historically to look back and see the beginnings of this new party. Thank you for sharing. RR: One of the things that I propose in election reform is that they allow all parties to campaign in primary elections. Let them all get into the campaign and you'll wash out those that aren't really going to be a contender and you're going to end up with two or three. Maybe there would be three candidates in November, but there's nothing wrong with that. Maybe the guy that wins the presidency only had 47 percent of the population, but that's okay. Other people ought to have the right to voice their point of view and have the American people hear it. ROH: I had a young political science student ask me a question that they wanted me to ask you. He said that a lot of his friends are just not interested in politics at all. I would say between the ages of 19 and 26 are the age of his friends right now. He wanted me to ask you why they should be interested or get involved in politics because their perception of everything they see is negative. RR: That's unfortunate. A lot of people are turned off by the negative campaigns. I am. I'd get tired of listening to them. In fact, I asked Ted Capner if he watched all of the debates and he said, "No." I said, "Neither did I." I couldn't watch them all because they were not productive. I'd tell these young kids, "If you are really interested in politics, find a candidate that you like who's telling the story the way 69 you like it and join that campaign. If you get involved in it you will see your way through all of these things. You'll see how productive it can be." When you're only 19 years old, you're not thinking about retirement, medical expenses, or high taxes. You just haven't been out in the real world yet. As soon as you get a job and get your paycheck and you find out how much money was taken out for social security and worker's compensation and all these other things you think, "Hey, I thought I was getting $200 and I got $150." That shocks them and that's the eye-opener to these people. It kind of goes along with what Winston Churchill said, "When you're 19 years old, if you're not a liberal you've got no heart, but when you're 55 years old, if you're not a conservative you've got no brains." ROH: Right. That was what he asked, "How does it impact my life? All I'm trying to do is survive." He's actually got a wife and a child. He's working, going to school and he's involved on campus in leadership. He said, "I don't see how I can even be a blip on the radar of what's going on nationally." RR: Well, that's a story I tell in my book. I started out as the junior Republican chairman at Weber Junior College in 1952. In 1980, I was the Republican National Chairman. I climbed up. President Reagan said, "He's had every job on the way up. This is the first chairman I know that's worked his way through the state and national chairmanship positions." There's opportunity out there for these guys and in order to really understand it, I think you have to get involved in a campaign. The guy who's going to school and has a wife and kids says, "I'm 70 worried about my health insurance and if we have another baby we can't afford the cost of it." Then insurance becomes interesting to him. After a while, he gets hurt on the job or he gets sick, then social security, Medicare, and disability becomes interesting to him. These things become interesting as he grows older and he's facing that proposition. Young people don't look that far ahead. They think they're invincible and indestructible. They just don't see the problems down the road. ROH: Right. So let's talk a little bit about your family. I know you've got lots of children. RR: I've got five. ROH: That's a good-sized family. Are any of them involved in politics? RR: No, that is the interesting thing. My oldest son is a professor of philosophy at the University of Alabama. His name is Richard Albert Richards. He was named after Annette's father. He started out to be a dancer professionally and he danced around the world as a ballet dancer. He was quite good, but not good enough to be a star, and if you're not a star you can't make a living doing it. He finally decided that it wasn't for him and he went back to school to study philosophy. When he went back to school, he took the college ACT test and he got in the 98th percentile and he was offered a full fellowship at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore. He got his degree there. He was a very good student and he had very good recommendations by the number one philosopher there and he went around to some of the colleges to seek employment and he ran into people that 71 said, "White men need not apply, we're going to hire a minority or a woman. So don't bother to apply." My oldest daughter, Julie Dockter, is married to a real estate salesman and they have four sons who are all doing very well. One of them is a businessman doing a lot of business with China and has made a lot of money. Another one is a medical doctor and his name is Dr. Dockter. Another one is in college studying something in physical sciences and the other one is a computer expert at Novell in Provo. My next daughter is married to a lawyer who's practicing law in New York. She's interested in politics, but she doesn't do much of it. She reads a lot and she gets involved a little bit but she has three kids and teaches early morning seminary and some other things. Her name is Jan Stevenson. My next daughter is Amy Hartvigsen and her husband is a landscape architect down in Alpine and they have four boys. The oldest is now on a mission. They have really talented kids. There is a lot of talent around my grandkids. My youngest son, Brian, works for the state of Utah in Utah Workplace. That's my family. I have ten grandchildren and eleven great grandchildren and four of those great grandchildren are part Chinese. My grandson, Chris Dockter married a Chinese girl from Taiwan. 72 ROH: I couldn't help but notice that you have a lot of art hanging in your home. RR: It's all family art. My father was the artist. ROH: Other people in your family are also artistically inclined. RR: Yes. My brother is an artist and he taught art at Dennison University in Dallas. My son, Rich, painted that big picture on the wall there. On the wall up there I've got paintings of my father, my brother, my daughter, and my son. We've all got a painting up there. My father is the best artist of the bunch. I have sisters that are very good. I think you saw the picture of the dogs in my bedroom. One of my sisters did that. There are a number of good artists in the family. The etching above the piano was by my brother. That big picture there is done by my son, Rich. The Abraham Lincoln was given to me by the Republican Party of Utah when I completed my term as state chairman. The star is a little thing that Richard Nixon gave out when he was elected president. The eagle is from the inauguration of Reagan and Bush. Geronimo is one that I just purchased. A friend of mine, Jay Taggert, former superintendent of the schools for Utah gave me the Teddy Roosevelt. ROH: Is there anything else that I might not have asked you that you would like to address? RR: I tell people jokingly that I used to be a genius, but now I'm just very bright. As a result of my heart operations, I have lost some mental acuity and I'm not as sharp as I used to be. My memory isn't as good. I have bad days so I'm limited. As a former National Chairman, I always have access to a seat at the national 73 conventions. They have one for former chairmen and I couldn't go so I asked them if my nephew could use my credentials so he went to the last convention. I went to every convention from 1968 until George W. Bush ran. I did not go then, but I went through Nixon, Reagan, and H. W. Bush. I've been to a lot of conventions. ROH: Is your nephew involved in politics now? RR: He's a lobbyist so he's a little bit involved in politics, but he likes to get involved. He has worked for candidates in the past. I don't have any children that wanted to be lawyers or wanted to be in politics. I wouldn't encourage them to be lawyers because I'm unhappy with the profession now. ROH: I was going to ask you if you encouraged them at all when they were younger to go into law or politics since they were living in Washington. RR: My girls were more enamored by living in Washington than my sons. They loved going to the White House and going to Kennedy Bunk Port and going to the parades and inaugurals and so on. They really enjoyed that. Everybody really loved being in that historical place, including me. ROH: Are there any stories about Ogden that many people might not know about or historical stories that would be just interesting to share? RR: Did you see the film that Isaac did on 25th Street? There is some historical stuff that I'm involved in on that 25th Street thing. When I went to law school, I drove from Ogden to Salt Lake and I had a couple of people that paid me to ride with 74 me. One of them was Annabelle Weakly and the other was Jane Larson. She was about 70 years old and she wanted to go back to school. She graduated from Weber College when she was 70 or 72. I got to know both of them fairly well. After I got out of law school I wanted to try lawsuits and I wanted to go to trial. If you want trial experience as a young lawyer you're not going to get it in a civil case. I went to the judges and said, "I want some trial experience so give me your criminals that don't have any money that are in jail and can't make bond." We didn't have a public defender system then. Over a period of one year they gave me 10 criminals and I tried the 10 felonies to a jury. I got 8 acquittals out of my 10 and that put me in business. I had lots of criminal business. In fact, it was too much. I ended up trying to get rid of it because I got tired of the criminals, but that's where I got my experience in the court room. I'll give you a quote from a guy if it won't sound politically incorrect, "One day I was walking along the street and this black guy came up to me and said, are you Mr. Richardson Richardson?" I said, "Well, I guess I am." He said, "Are you the man that represented Copeland Griffin?" I said, "I guess that's right." He said, "Well, let me shake your hand. You must be good. He was the biggest crook in town." Two of my defenses were for one guy and I won both of the cases and this impressed those in the black community. All my life I've been interested in politics, not for the sake of winning, but for the sake of helping the country. I've been concerned about the country. I see things that I don't think are right and I don't know whether I told you this story but when I was pretty new in the practice, we saw some misconduct and what I call 75 criminal activity on the part of elected officials in Weber County. I was instrumental in getting a grand jury called and ended up putting a sheriff in jail and some other things. These guys were doing a lot of things wrong. ROH: No, you didn't mention that? Who was the Sheriff? RR: It was LeRoy Hadley. I was representing a guy by the name of Ralph Anderson. He was a federal prisoner being housed in Ogden and waiting for his appeal in the tenth circuit. He appeared to have the run of the jail. Every time I'd go up to jail to see another client I'd see him hanging around. He wasn't in a cell, he was hanging around. One of these guys that had tattoos on his arm and had a pack of cigarettes rolled up in his shirt sleeve tried to hire me to represent him and he wanted an appeal to the tenth circuit. He was in jail for burglarizing a couple of post offices. He and his brother-in-law would drive a particularly adapted automobile up to these small post offices, break in, wheel the safe out and put it in the trunk of the car and drive up into the mountains and blow it up with dynamite and take out the money orders and postage stamps. He said, "Dick, I'll hire you. I'll give you $10,000 to represent me. I've got $60,000 stolen in postal money orders up in Pocatello. I can sell those for $20,000 and I'll give you half of it." I said, "No thanks. Not interested." Anyway, as time went on I talked to the guy and one day his wife came to me and said, "Mr. Richards, they're going to let Andy out of jail again this weekend. I'm afraid if he gets caught out of jail when he's supposed to be in jail the sheriff will say he escaped and he'll get an extra 5 or 10 years punishment." 76 When I found out they were letting him out of jail I said, "I've got to tell the judge. I am an officer of the court so I have to tell Judge Anderson, the federal judge in Salt Lake, what's happening here." I called the judge and he said, "You ought to call Judge Ritter." I said, "Judge, I don't like Judge Ritter and he doesn't like me so I'm telling you. I've now done my duty." As a result of what happened here a grand jury was called and the grand jury heard the evidence that the sheriff would let him out on weekends and he'd go burglarize someplace and share what he stole with the sheriff. The grand jury said to contact him and ask him to give some specifics about one of the burglaries that only the burglar would know. We'll find out if he's telling the truth. He said, "I knocked off the Red Pantry Café on the corner of Ogden Avenue and 25th Street. I got in by kicking in the back door with my foot and I left a shoe print on the door so I had to get rid of the shoes afterward. When I went in I got into the cigarette machines, I got into jukeboxes and I stole the stuff out of there. One thing that was very peculiar is when I got the jukebox money, there were a lot of quarters with red fingernail polish on them. I don't know what that meant, but that's what I took." They called in the man that owned the Red Pantry Café and said, "What about the money in the jukebox? Is there anything unusual about it?" he said, "Oh yeah, part of those quarters are what I call show quarters. I put red fingernail polish on the ones I put in so I get them back. When somebody saw other people put in for music they'd play music. They were show coins. I got to keep them and 77 the guy that owned the music company would take all the others." That was proof that my guy stole the money out of the jukebox. Finally, they put the sheriff on trial. When it was known that the sheriff let the guy out, his attorney said, "Sheriff, isn't it true that the reason you let him out was to take him to your home and show him what good law abiding citizens lived like and to get a little spirituality in your life?" The guy said, "No, that isn't true." The lawyer asked the question, "Well, why did you let him out?" He said, "Greed, Mr. Alsup. Greed." They convicted the sheriff and the sheriff was put in jail down in Davis County. ROH: What year was this? RR: I don't know what year it was. I went back to Washington shortly after that. The sheriff came up to me one time when I was alone and said, "Richard, you son of bitch. I'll get you for this." He threatened me, but I didn't say anything about it. He went to jail and some of the other public officials lost their jobs and it kind of cleaned up the community. The interesting part of that is that one of the guys that we had as our plaintiff in our action against the county officials was the lieutenant governor's father. He ran a janitorial supply place in Ogden on 25th Street. His name was George Bell. His son is now the Lieutenant governor. It took courage on the part of his father to act as a plaintiff in the case. It was a taxpayer's lawsuit filed against him because they were crooked. The