Jesus of Nazareth - Pope Benedict XVI

If you are interested in all in the Christian faith, you should read this book. Pope Benedict XVI takes various aspects of our faith and puts them into a scriptural context. For example, the parable of the Good Samaritan – the Pope says that the man who lay by the side of the road, beaten, stripped and robbed is symbolic of Adam, and of man in general. He compares the fate that befell this man to the fate of the poor, the afflicted, the victims amongst us. Benedict challenges us to be good neighbours to these people. Taking it a bit further, I have at times tried to imagine myself as each of the characters in the story. I can perfectly understand why some people walked by – he might have been dead, it might have been a trap laid by robbers, it might have slowed me down after the sun had gone down and put my own life in danger!

I can also imagine being the victim of violence and rejection. I have imagined being the innkeeper, trusting that the Samaritan would be back to pay an extra costs, accepting a guest who was clearly going to be “high maintenance.” And occasionally I have wondered if I could ever be the Samaritan – on the fringe, unwelcome in good company, but forgiving and able to do the right thing when no one, not one person, would blame him for walking by.

What kind of neighbour am I to God’s people across this world, some as far away as the other side of my fence?

Not to simplify it, but the Pope’s writings tell us we're on the right track. The Catholic faith is under a lot of pressure these days. If there is some sort of "other" agenda in the Catholic church, I’ve yet to discover it. This Pope speaks of love, a love which transcends religious differences and is rooted in Christ. One doesn't have to be a member of the Catholic faith to agree with that.

The Hungry Trekker Restaurant Review - Il Fornello, Toronto

Il Fornello, Toronto - one snowy day in March, 2008

Good - atmosphere, thin-crust pizza, creativity. The Pollo Pizza was recommended by Barbra Streisand (it says so right on the menu) so I tried it. It was a nice light lunch; I liked it, but it wasn't so good that I'd have Il Fornello cater my food on my private jet to Boston, like Babs did.

Great - "all ontario" section on the menu (but who would have thought of putting potatoes on a thin crust pizza? I didn't try it, so maybe it's a good idea.) Nice to see some support of Ontario grown produce, apples, blueberries, locally raised chickens... Other restaurants should follow suit.

Room to grow - service. Less than attentive. Charlie's Angels was playing on the TV at the bar, so it took precedence over guests in the dining room. I waited a long time to have my order taken, my cheque delivered and I really could have used a refill on my water. The waiter just wasn't around much, and it wasn't because it was busy.

This is the ultimate service trap - when it's not busy the staff get distracted with non-service related things - like TV and each other at the bar.

The ultimate comment card question (the only one that matters): Would you come back?
My answer: Yes

JT

Freedom to speak

I was absolutely horrified in the closing moments of the final luncheon at the PCMA Conference in Toronto when a young lady stood up to ask a question, and told Newt Gingrich and Jean Chrétien that she had waited six years for this very moment. At her tender age of 26, that seems like a very long time, no doubt. “Nothing good can come of this,” I thought. Sure enough, in one fell swoop she managed to insult our American friends, make strident political statements and bring the conclusion of an otherwise outstanding conference crashing to a halt. “America is a nation of idiots,” she declared as part of an anti-war rant. The room fell silent. I think many Canadians in the room feared that the good will we had built with our American friends might now be in jeapordy. Would they think we all feel that way? As good fortune would have it after the conference I had the opportunity to meet “La” (that’s what her name tag said). I had assumed she was some sort of political activist who had commandeered credentials and was using our forum as a platform for her views. Not so. She told me she had just learned of the PCMA conference and had been in business for only six days. She decided we were a good base from which to launch her aggressive global business plans - something about meeting planners and municipal planning that I didn’t understand. She was misinformed about PCMA, thinking this was a conference of travel agents. She told me she hoped that she hadn’t offended anyone, and I assured her that she had indeed. That said, in retrospect, we have to realize that if PCMA is going to invite political figures to speak at our conferences and then open the floor to questions, stuff like this is bound to happen sooner or later. My first inclination was that she should never have been given the opportunity to speak, but that is wrong. Every day most Americans ask God to bless their beautiful country and Canadians implore God to keep our land glorious and free. Perhaps God has answered our humble prayers by sending this citizen to remind us of our rights to freedom of speech, however misplaced her idealism was on that day. I shook her hand, wished her well, and forgave her inappropriate spontaneity.

Calling God by Name, Finally...

I recently attended the Professional Convention Management Association in Seattle. After four days at the conference and countless speakers, someone finally named God. Mr. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ended his talk by referring to Him as the creator, but then went on to specifically use His name – God. He pointed out that every major religion can trace a defining moment to time spent in the wilderness. Kennedy said, and I parphrase from memory, that "Buddha and Mohammed went into and came out of the wilderness and moved their religions forward – Mohammed to write the Koran, Buddha to discover Nirvana. Moses spent his time on the mountain productively, emerging with the Ten Commandments. Christ realized his divinity after forty days in the wilderness, and John the Baptist, Christ’s mentor (Kennedy’s words) lived in a desert on locusts and honey. Kennedy’s point, in defense of ecology, was that if one wants to see the face of God (metaphorically) or be closer the Creator, one must study and appreciate creation. That’s a fair point. He compared it to Michaelangelo. You can read about his work, or you can go and see it with your own eyes. Kennedy said that God communicates through works of art, through music, through man and through nature."

Amongst the many good points Kennedy made, I realized two things. First, that before he spoke today not one speaker or presenter that I heard had attributed anything to God the entire time we were here. That’s not unusual at these conferences, but I do long for the days when we began a meal with a prayer. Heck, I would love the chance to get to Mass on Sunday but usually the conference agenda fails to account for people of faith, whatever faith. That has to change.

And secondly, unless we give credit where credit is due, unless we allow God, we leave the door wide open to the evil one.

The Two Faces of My City Councilor

My City Councilor is posing as the champion of the Library that he, with the help of our Mayor and a few others on Council, has systematically sought to dismantle. He's counting on the public's memory being short. It is. When the Library is dead and gone he'll be remembered as the scrappy dude who tried to save it, not the guy who was pounding the nails in the Libary's coffin all along. Read the article:

Ordered cuts force tough library choices

Dave Hall
Windsor Star
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Facing a demand from city council to cut almost $800,000 from its 2008 budget without closing branches or clawing back hours, Windsor's library board contiunues to wrestle with unpalatable options, said the chairman of the board.
And because about $6 million of the library's $8.8-million budget is tied up in wages and benefits for its 170 employees, the board is actually trying to slash more than 25 per cent from the remaining $2.8 million.
"It's already bone on bone," said board chairman and Coun. Alan Halberstadt, following a meeting Friday. "If we do not cut hours and close branches, we may have to decide what kind of branches we want.
"Do we want fully serviced libraries or do we want to turn them into rest stations where people can read free newspapers, socialize and come in out of the extreme weather?" said Halberstadt.
Closing four unspecified branches and eliminating Sunday hours except at the central branch would achieve the desired savings but council has demanded they be found without reducing services.
Reducing spending on materials would lengthen the wait for books that is already six months long for some titles. Such cuts would further erode the library's usage figures, which fall below the median for cities of Windsor's size across Ontario.
None of the suggestions raised Friday are binding, since the four-person board doesn't have enough members to legally make decisions and won't return to its full seven-member strength until January at the earliest.
Doug McNeil, president of CUPE Local 2067.1, which represents almost 90 workers, said "the board is in a very tough position and I think we'll ultimately have to look at Sunday closings.
"Perhaps not a complete year-round cutback but a limited schedule of Sunday hours might be workable," said McNeil.
The contract between the library board and the local expires Dec. 31 and discussions on a new agreement are expected to begin in February.
"I don't know how you negotiate salary reductions," said Halberstadt. "And there's not a lot of room to reduce staff if you keep the same number of branches open so we're really in an almost impossible position."
According to provisions in the Library Act, council has the right to determine how much funding to provide but it's up to the board to decide how and where it's spent. As a result, the board could force a showdown with council if it decides that closures and reduced hours are the only answer to the budget crunch.
"These are clearly unreasonable demands at the same time as you want the same level of services to be maintained," said Halberstadt.
© The Windsor Star 2007

Really Alan? More unreasonable than when you were on the budget committee demanding a $750,000 cut to the Library's budget at the same time as demanding a new branch be opened in your Ward? What's changed?

JT

Keep the property taxes low - by tearing the heart out of the city

What has our City Council got against the children and the less fortunate in our city? They are cutting $800,000 dollars out of the budget for the public Library, foolishly suggesting that service won't be affected. Horse crap. There's books in that there Library that explain economics, if any of our City Councilors had Library cards. (Word is the two councilors on the Library Board had no record of holding library cards until they were issued with their orientation packages.) But secondly, City Council is considering cutting out crossing guards. Well and good if mommy or daddy drives precious the two kilometres from home to school, not so good if the child has to walk. Not so good to the soon to be unemployed crossing guards. Not so good to the families about to lose a second income - the difference between paying for a school trip for some, of avoiding a trip to the food bank for others. Again - the marginalized pay the price while the wealthy enjoy stable property taxes and complain that the city is going to hell in a handbasket.

By the way - when was the last time anyone heard our Mayor or any of the Councilors stand up and say anything in defense of the poor, the marginalized, the lowly?

Three in one

My Ward Councilor has been in office for well over a decade. He's part of the problem, or the solution, depending on where you stand. He is also a major muck-raker, sort of a self-declared official opposition. It brings progress to a dead stop, since the only thing he can do is to argue against everything. And to justify it all, he writes a column about, well, himself in the local magrag. When he doesn't write about himself, he criticizes others without the burden of research or proof. The only editorialist assigned to the City Hall beat is his best friend - they have an annual retreat in the backwoods of Northern Ontario, after which the columnist routinely endorses his best friend and declares a conflict at the same time. It might not be brokeback, but it needs fixing. My councilor is the government, the opposition, and the fifth estate. And he just keeps getting elected. The guy actually votes in favour of something on Monday night, blogs against it on Tuesday, and takes his fellow councillors to task on Wednesday, deposits a paycheque on Thursday, publishes on a Friday and squats on 26 different committees in his spare time from either side of the same fence.

Not bad work if you can get it.

It's a wonderful life - local remake

The local rag reports that the CEO of my Credit Union he has played the top 100 golf courses in the world. Once upon a time in a simpler, albeit fictional time, George Bailey never left his little town. Our Credit Union boss never comes home, apparently. It truly is a Wonderful Life, for some.

Drivers License for High School Students

Hansard - Ontario Legislature Wednesday August 30, 2006

JEREMY TYRRELL
The Chair: Our next presentation will come to us by teleconference. Mr. Jeremy Tyrrell, the former chair of the Assumption school council and PTA member. Mr. Tyrrell, can you hear us?

Mr. Tyrrell: Thank you. My name is Jeremy Tyrrell. I'm the former chair of the Assumption school council parent committee. I state that I've been part of PTA and parent council for 20 years. It's actually only 19, but I still have a bit of experience to share.
Our youngest starts high school in about a week. We've got three children, all of whom have done well in our school system.

1330
All three of our kids have been very active in sports, in school government, in experiential learning.

I would like to express my support of the bill as stated in the preamble, in that I think it addresses the issue of experiential learning. It shows a respect for school happenings, a little bit more than just inside the school building. For the most part, I think the bill works towards a good cause.

The part of the bill that I'm particularly pleased with is making it a penalty for employers to employ anybody who should be in school, basically. As a restaurateur for many years, I always made it my own personal point to make sure that if the kids were supposed to be in school, they weren't working for me at that time.

Mr. Tyrrell: I'd like to get right to the point of the bill which I don't agree with, and that is the driver's licence. I'm sure you must be hearing from others about that. When a child drops out of school, they're automatically marginalized from their own society. In my years on a parent council, I think that was the one thing we always tried to focus on -- not just on the kids who were doing very well and not just on the kids who were involved, but on the students who are really not speaking up. You can't hear them, their parents aren't there to speak for them and they risk being marginalized. When a child drops out of school, they're automatically marginalized from their own society. By denying them the right to get a driver's licence, or by suspending their driver's licence pending their return to school, we further marginalize them, I think.
I'm calling this, for my use, the pudding clause. If you remember the Pink Floyd song The Wall, "How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?" We look at school as the meat and the driver's licence as the pudding.
Now, I'd like to look at it a little differently than that. I'm not one of these people who doesn't believe in consequences -- I do -- but have you considered, has it come up, that perhaps the driver's licence could be part of the school experience? What I'm suggesting is that what if there were a credit for getting a driver's licence? What if there were classes available in the school that would study driving, make safer drivers out of these students and they could in turn get a credit out of that? Obviously that's not going to be of much interest to those who are university or college-bound, but for those kids who aren't planning on that and are looking to get a general diploma, this could count as a credit towards it and would, in the same way as your bill does, include it as part of the overall experience of learning happening outside of the schoolroom and that there's more to it than just the three Rs.
That's basically what I have to say. I'm sure you've heard from others about the driver's licence issue, and I'd be happy to entertain questions if you have any.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We should have an opportunity for each party to ask you at least one question, beginning with Ms. Wynne from the Liberals.
Ms. Wynne: Mr. Tyrrell, can you hear me?
Mr. Tyrrell: Yes, I can. Thank you.
Ms. Wynne: I just want to be clear about what you're suggesting. You're suggesting that you make a driver's licence course a credit, so that by definition, students would be in school if they're 16, 17. You're not opposed to the idea of keeping kids in school until they're 18. You're suggesting that the driver's licence become part of the Ontario curriculum.
Mr. Tyrrell: I think that would be a workable solution. I don't mean it to be sort of a trick to keep kids in school, but by definition they'd have to be 16 to take the course. It would be a reward for staying in school and something they could work towards.
I use my own nephew as an example. He dropped out of school just a couple of credits short and then still went out and got his driver's licence. I think he had something to offer; he just couldn't find it there. It might have worked for him if it were a credit.
Ms. Wynne: So you're supportive of the other parts of this initiative, which are to offer those alternative programs. You think that's fine, and you'd like to see this as part of the Ontario curriculum.
Mr. Tyrrell: I think it's a wonderful idea. It's taking great strides forward.
Ms. Wynne: Thank you.
The Chair: Mr. Miller from the Progressive Conservative caucus.
Mr. Miller: Thank you very much for your presentation. Your idea about drivers' licences is interesting. Certainly in my area of Parry Sound-Muskoka, a driver's licence is pretty much a necessity in a rural northern area. That's an interesting idea.
You're the first person I've heard come before the committee who supports penalties for employers. I'm just wondering why you support that, especially when you don't agree with the punitive measures in terms of the driver's licence. You say that would further marginalize dropouts. Why wouldn't penalizing someone who drops out but gets a job, probably out of necessity -- I'd like to hear why you support penalizing dropouts by penalizing the employers who might provide them with some income.
Mr. Tyrrell: To clear it up, there should probably be a way if the student could prove to the necessary authorities that he had to do it, perhaps for financial or family reasons. There are a lot of reasons kids drop out beyond the fact that they're just bored, and we have to take that into account. But there are also kids who see that the opportunity to work and make some money is more enticing than attending school. Those are the ones who I think the bill targets, and that's who I meant by saying I support that sort of penalty. So there could be a system in place.
Mr. Miller: If I understand you correctly, there should be an exemption for those other cases, the hardship cases or cases where --
Mr. Tyrrell: Absolutely.
The Chair: Thank you. Mr. Marchese from the NDP caucus.
Mr. Marchese: Jeremy, I just have a couple of comments that you might want to respond to. I think the whole focus of this bill is wrong. I would have expected the Conservative government to have done it but not the Liberals, so it puzzles me.
Fining employers I believe is a mistaken thing; to say we've got to put the onus on the employer who might be hiring somebody who left of his or her own free will to find employment.
Fining a parent $1,000 instead of the old $200 is another wrong focus because it says the parent is at fault rather than something wrong with the student.
And third, the whole idea of creating an equivalent learning option that will require a whole bureaucracy to supervise the people who are doing the course, who is monitoring them, who they're accountable to, who's actually doing it, is a costly affair.
I think a whole lot of students who leave have a lot of social, psychological and learning problems.
The Chair: Okay, Mr. Tyrrell, we need you to respond to that.
Mr. Marchese: This bill won't reach them. That's why forcing kids to stay in school is wrong. What do you think?
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Marchese. Mr. Tyrrell, you have a brief moment to respond.
Mr. Tyrrell: Sure. If it were phrased in the form of a question, I would say that the bill serves to encompass the entire community as part of it. I believe there should be consequences. You just can't say, "You've got to stay in school until 18," and then somebody drops out and there are no consequences.
Secondly, to clarify the fine to the parents, it's only until they're 16, not between 16 and 18.
Getting employers involved -- I think we need to have the entire community show a vested interest in having those kids get their high school diplomas and stay until they're 18.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Tyrrell. That concludes the time we have, and thank you very much for calling in to us today.
Mr. Tyrrell: My pleasure.

In support of the Separate School System in Ontario

Modern Catholic education does not deny the existence of science, although Public education in Essex County clearly denies the existence of God, according to Trustee Julia Burgess. This is why many followers of monotheistic religions choose Separate schools for the education and formation of our children. I am, however, concerned that the leadership of an "open-minded" and inclusive school system regards Christianity with hostility and contempt. Whatever our differing viewpoints on the Provincial funding model, I pray that the Trustee will reconsider her ideological abhorrence of faith based learning, which goes far beyond the folklore and ethnic tradition that Burgess disdainfully and inaccurately identifies with the Catholicism.

Jeremy Tyrrell, Windsor Ontario

In response to the letter from Trustee Julia Burgess, published in the Windsor Star:

Secular school system best for everyone
LetterPublished: Saturday, September 08, 2007
As a school board trustee, my colleagues and I allocate taxpayers' hard earned monies to implement sound educational policies. Our goal is to allot resources where there is data and evidence of its worth in providing continuous improvement in student achievement. I therefore find it ludicrous for John Tory to suggest that public funding should be extended to faith-based schools that foster the teaching of creationism with any credibility outside of folklore and ethnic tradition. The Ontario science curriculum supports the teaching of evolution as the overwhelming global scientific community agrees it is fact. This is mirrored by the equally large majority of Ontarians of all faiths and beliefs who accept the data and evidence as proof of it. If Mr. Tory -- or any other politician - wants to address the "fairness" issue of the UN citing Canada, and Ontario in particular, to be in violation of publicly funding religious education of one denomination (RC) to the exclusion of all others, perhaps he should have looked at the other acceptable solution the UN gave -- and the one that a recent poll says Ontarians most support -- one secular publicly funded education system in both official languages where all kids from all neighbourhoods live, learn and play together without any specific religious indoctrination.
Course content in social sciences, world religion and history will present explanations that society has offered through the ages concerning our genesis as a species. Our parents and families do a fine job of teaching our kids whether they believe it was the Great Raven, the Big Bang or a heavenly creator who eventually put the first human genes together. Mr. Tory's solution will only seclude the like-minded and deny valuable resources to the open minded.
JULIA BURGESS