This website is the home site of my criminal reformation apostolate; here you can find details about the Lampstand Foundation which I founded as a 501c (3) nonprofit corporation in Sacramento, California in 2003.

I have written twelve books, one being about Lampstand and each one of the other eleven being  a response to a likely objection to Catholicism that will be encountered when doing ministry to professional criminals; and for links to all of the Lampstand books which are available—free to members—and at Amazon, go to http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=david+h+lukenbill

I also maintain a daily blog, The Catholic Eye, https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/

Lampstand also keeps track of rehabilitative programs that fail, and the one or two that appear to work, with the findings available at https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/evaluation-of-reentry-programs-3/

The work connected to the apostolate is listed under the home page categories (to your left) which I will be expanding as needed.

______________________________________________________

Failure of Criminal Justice Policies

It is stunning, as this story from City Journal reports.

An excerpt.

“For the last decade, radical prosecutors and progressive politicians have been proposing and enacting illogical criminal-justice policies, often with little consideration for the real-world effects of these ideas. Enough time has passed for an evidence-based assessment of how these policies have played out in the real world.

“Gun Buybacks: Politicians in big cities believe that gun-buyback programs will reduce the violent crime that is spiking in America’s urban centers. But comprehensive research shows no evidence that such programs work. Philadelphia just completed a three-year gun-buyback program that yielded over 1,000 firearms. Not a single recovered firearm was linked to violent crime and, during the course of the program, Philadelphia set new all-time records for homicides. “It’s not reaching the area of the community that’s possessing illegal guns and using them,” says criminologist Joseph Giacalone. “It’s political theater.”

“Violence Interrupters”: Progressive prosecutors tout violence interrupters—former gang members and convicts who mediate disputes on the streets—as a serious weapon against crime. Cities led by “reform” prosecutors, such as Baltimore, Indianapolis, and Philadelphia have staked a lot on this idea. The results have not been encouraging. Multiple violence interrupters have been murdered in Baltimore. In Indianapolis, the former convict in charge of training violence interrupters was arrested for threatening a woman and had to be fired. In Philadelphia, a violence interrupter shot three people in a bar while he was working his anti-violence job. And a recent research paper states that violence interrupters, despite their tough histories, are suffering from severe trauma, mainly because they are being exposed to the type of violence that police officers face every day (imagine that). The real question for violence-interruption programs is whether they might be adding fuel to the fire of violent crime.

“Decarceration: Liberal policy groups like the Prison Policy Initiative, with the support of legal academics, have railed against “mass incarceration” in the United States for decades, asserting that the United States could free thousands of prisoners, even violent criminals, without affecting public safety. For their argument to make any sense, they have to push for the release of violent criminals because—as even leading decarceration advocate John Pfaff concedes—the vast majority of criminals are incarcerated for violent crimes. The decarceration advocates largely have seen their wishes granted. According to the Pew Research Center, by 2019, incarceration rates in America had fallen to the same level as 1995, then were reduced even further during the Covid-19 pandemic. How is that working out? The United States saw its biggest single-year rise in homicide in 2020, and the murder rates continued to rise in 2021. Homicides in many cities reached levels unseen since the 1990s, when incarceration rates were as low as they are now. The incarceration-versus-violent-crime relationship is statistically complex, but the wholesale release of violent criminals serves as one more contributor to increasing murders in American cities.

“No Cash Bail: Fair and Just Prosecution, a think tank for radical prosecutors, has long championed a “no cash bail” policy, claiming that detaining people pretrial is simply a way of locking up the poor. In 2020, New York passed legislation substantially reducing the state’s ability to keep even violent criminals detained after they were arrested. The resulting spike in violent crimes by defendants released back to the streets led even Democratic New York governor Kathy Hochul to roll back this misguided reform in 2022, much to the relief of police and citizens. It turns out that detaining violent criminals between arrest and trial is vital for public safety. Who knew?”

The Failure of Progressive Criminal-Justice Reforms | City Journal (city-journal.org)

This website is the home site of my criminal reformation apostolate; here you can find details about the Lampstand Foundation which I founded as a 501c (3) nonprofit corporation in Sacramento, California in 2003.

I have written twelve books, one being about Lampstand and each one of the other eleven being  a response to a likely objection to Catholicism that will be encountered when doing ministry to professional criminals; and for links to all of the Lampstand books which are available—free to members—and at Amazon, go to http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=david+h+lukenbill

I also maintain a daily blog, The Catholic Eye, https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/

Lampstand also keeps track of rehabilitative programs that fail, and the one or two that appear to work, with the findings available at https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/evaluation-of-reentry-programs-3/

The work connected to the apostolate is listed under the home page categories (to your left) which I will be expanding as needed.

________

The Lampstand Foundation E-Letter:

No. 166, November 16, 2020

Integralism

Having recently begun reading the book reviewed at Rorate Caeli, this was appreciated; an excellent review.

 An excerpt.

“I had been hoping to find time to write a detailed review of the excellent new book Integralism: A Manual of Political Philosophy by Fr. Thomas Crean, O.P., and Alan Fimister, published by Editiones Scholasticae. It is a compact, well-written, deftly argued, and remarkably comprehensive manual presenting, without embarrassment or attenuation, the traditional political philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church, with the social kingship of Jesus Christ, Lord of heaven and earth, at its core, and Christendom as its natural flowering and exemplar. Twelve chapters discuss: 1. Societies and the perfect society; 2. The common good and authority; 3. The family; 4. Servitude; 5. Temporal authority (1): its origin; 6. Temporal authority (2): its scope; 7. Law; 8. Forms of policy; 9. Political economy; 10. International relations; 11. The two swords; 12. The two cities.

 “As it happened, however, it took a frustrating and yet revealing review of it at Commonweal, “The New Integralists,” to move me to take up my pen. I think it will become apparent, by my response, that I consider Crean and Fimister’s work not only important but decisive for our times; it is a great step forward in the conversations and decisions that must take place.

 “Notre Dame theology doctoral student Timothy Troutner has officially sounded the alarm at the “resurgence” of integralism, which he laughably considers the greatest threat to the Catholic Church at the present moment. Would that it were! My prayer is that it may yet become the greatest threat, not of course to the Catholic Church per se, but to the humiliated simulacrum of that Church that we all too frequently encounter in its leaders and adherents.

 “Troutner frequently and indolently draws on a well of respectable suspicion of “right-wing” movements, counting on readers to be horrified along with him. Every few sentences he reminds us that the integralists say shocking and horrifying things about minorities, women, and sex that ought to disqualify them immediately from any serious consideration. And judging from the lack of serious consideration in the review, it seems that Troutner’s words are not merely informative but performative. As a result, the “review,” if such it may be called, ends up sounding more like a New York Times editorial by a writer who, five years later, still refuses to try to understand Trump supporters.

“Our anti-integralist critic is a narrative-driven fellow and an historicist who urges us to dig deeper into history. But everywhere we dig, we’ll find integralism of one sort or another, until we reach recent times, which are too shallow for digging. He says, on the one hand, that the “Constantinian experiment” shouldn’t be dismissed, but on the other hand, that religious liberty is an unquestionable human right. I don’t see how one can hold both of these positions. Either the Church was wickedly perverse from the fourth century on, and the whole tradition is vitiated—or we have to reexamine our modern dogmas. For Troutner, modernity has definitively won; relitigating the Enlightenment is not even on the table as a speculative option.

“So far from walking a mile in someone else’s shoes, Troutner refuses to give integralism the basic courtesy of recognizing it for what it is obviously is: a coherent body of thought, deriving from natural and supernatural principles. He does not address the system’s philosophical underpinnings, namely, an account of man as a social-political animal, nor does he seem aware of the central dominating influence of the Laval School (especially Charles De Koninck) and its robust account of the common good. These profound philosophical and theological foundations have been excluded or ignored in the postconciliar period; the integralists are trying to reclaim them and reinvigorate them. It seems that the only thing the opposition can do is whine and wring their hands that they might have to give up the super-dogma of religious liberty and its native environment of Americanism.

 “It will be illuminating to consider for a moment the University of Notre Dame, itself a microcosm of the whole problem to which the new integralists are responding. Notre Dame theologians—the five or so orthodox ones—can sit there defending the establishment while countless thousands of students go through their entire ND schooling without any Catholic formation. It is a place where traditionalists have no voice among professors or student groups, and liberals have always run wild. Has ND’s postconciliar period been a “springtime”? The only reminder of Catholicism are the pretty buildings. Against this backdrop, appealing to a never-realized new consensus of theologians (where is it, exactly?) erodes the establishment’s credibility. The magical third way will not materialize, because there will be too little of the compromise Church left after successive waves of modernist colonization. Thundering ivory-tower condemnations of integralism only further discredit the comfortable but vapid establishment, making any rapprochement between neo-cons and Catholics recede further from the realm of possibility.

“Where else, except among the integralists, is anyone grappling with the preconciliar tradition in a sustained and serious way, rather than rearranging deckchairs while the barque of Peter lurches toward shipwreck? One will look through Troutner’s hyperventilating review in vain for any reflection on, or even acknowledgment of, what the Francis papacy is doing to the Church, or how the unopposed proliferation of intraecclesial LGBTQ jihadis are corrupting our moral sense, or how U.N.-style human rights are in fact dissolving human communities and their intrinsic goods.

“Troutner finds even the genre of Crean and Fimister’s book—that, namely, of a scholastic manual—to be a disguised threat. Surely, only someone longing to burn heretics and reestablish misogyny would dare to choose a manual format! Yet might it not, more prosaically, be a reaction against the sprawling emptiness of postconciliar discourse, which speaks much and says little? In the flood of “reflections” on “social teaching,” little or no coherent teaching has emerged, little or no engagement of hard questions, little or no admission that there are serious contradictions between a past consensus and the present battery of opinions, which are casually treated as unquestionable dogmas. In such circumstances, nothing could be better than choosing a more methodical rational approach, which avoids the vanity of “declarations” on this or that subject, usually descending to self-congratulations. The postconciliar period has little to offer in the way of genre for substantive reflections on human nature, society, governance, and law. As observant Thomists, Crean and Fimister have chosen both the form and the matter that befit the end or final cause in view.

 “The low quality of Troutner’s review may be seen in his dismissal of the concept of the husband having a “right” over his wife’s body, which he portrays as little better than sex slavery. Yet the notion that by the marriage contract each spouse (it’s a two-way street) gives the other a right to his or her body for marital union is as old as the hills and as universal as Catholicism. It would behoove a reviewer of a book like this to know some canon law and sacramental theology. Those who revere Christendom also know that spouses in olden times would refrain from the use of marriage during penitential seasons, and that some even chose to live together in perfect continence. This shows a level of equality and a striving for sanctity barely conceivable to modern Catholics.

 “In her review at Catholic World Report, Dr. Derya M. Little, a convert from Islam to Catholicism, gives us a calmer, more sympathetic assessment. It would seem that this Catholic woman, a scholar and writer, did not find herself mortally offended by Crean and Fimister; she found the book invigorating. John Ehrett’s review, “Reuniting Church and State,” at the Claremont Review of Books, while critical of the content, also expresses admiration for its consistency, clarity, and, yes, integrity. Troutner, meanwhile, writes it off as reactionary nostalgia, which is entirely to miss the point. Crean and Fimister are seeking the truth about human society and a political order that leads to human flourishing in Christ, rather than an inhuman society and an anti-political disorder that leads to human degradation and damnation. That is no matter of reactionary nostalgia. If anything, it would seem that those who cling to Dignitatis Humanae and Gaudium et Spes are very much more in danger of nostalgia these days than those who have judged recent decades to be an unfortunate period of amnesia or madness out of which the Church is slowly emerging.”

 Retrieved October 30, 2020 from https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/10/conservative-fragility-integralism-on_30.html#more

 Be well everyone, and pray the old school rosary in the old school way, see https://catholiceye.wordpress.com//?s=15+decade+rosary&search=Go

____________________

David H. Lukenbill, President, The Lampstand Foundation                                                                                   

Post Office Box 254794   Sacramento, CA 95865-4794

Website: https://davidhlukenbill.wordpress.com/                                                

Blog: www.catholiceye.wordpress.com  

E-Mail: Dlukenbill@msn.com

With Peter to Christ through Mary

This website is the home site of my criminal reformation apostolate; here you can find details about the Lampstand Foundation which I founded as a 501c (3) nonprofit corporation in Sacramento, California in 2003.

I have written twelve books, one being about Lampstand and each one of the other eleven being  a response to a likely objection to Catholicism that will be encountered when doing ministry to professional criminals; and for links to all of the Lampstand books which are available—free to members—and at Amazon, go to http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=david+h+lukenbill

I also maintain a daily blog, The Catholic Eye, https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/

Lampstand also keeps track of rehabilitative programs that fail, and the one or two that appear to work, with the findings available at https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/evaluation-of-reentry-programs-3/

The work connected to the apostolate is listed under the home page categories (to your left) which I will be expanding as needed.

________

The Lampstand Foundation E-Letter:

No. 165, October 16, 2020

We Need the Police

One of the most astute observers of criminal justice issues is Heather Mac Donald, a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, publisher of City Journal, from which this article she wrote was published in June of this year.

An excerpt.

“How lovely when we see the police! They are my friends.”

So said an elderly lady attending a police-community meeting in the Bronx several years ago. Her voice is representative of the thousands of senior citizens, middle-aged workers, and small-business owners who fervently support the New York Police Department. These vulnerable New Yorkers want more police presence, not less; they view officers as their only protection against predation. What will the activists seeking to defund the NYPD tell these law-abiding residents—that they are now on their own?

The people who live in high-crime neighborhoods understand more about policing than the anti-cop agitators. Since the early 1990s, when the homicide toll in New York City topped 2,000 per year, tens of thousands of lives have been saved, thanks to the NYPD’s highly responsive, data-driven policing. That policing model, known as Compstat, holds precinct commanders ruthlessly accountable for crime in their jurisdiction; it has driven homicide down 86 percent from 1990, to only 319 in 2019. Most of the lives saved by suppressing crime since then have been black and Hispanic.

At the same time that the department has lowered crime to levels that would have been viewed as unimaginable three decades ago, it has radically cut its use of lethal force; the NYPD has among the lowest per-capita rates of officer shootings among big-city departments nationwide. In 2018, the most recent year for which full data are available, NYPD recorded the lowest number of shooting incidents since records were first kept in 1971—35—and the lowest number of subjects shot and killed: five. Four of those suspects were threatening officers with guns or knives; the fifth, reported as being armed by bystanders, pointed what appeared to be a gun at the responding cops.

New Yorkers who live in gang territory still fear lawlessness, however, and implore the police to bring order to the streets. At the 41st Precinct in the South Bronx a while back, residents complained repeatedly about large groups of youth hanging out on corners. “There’s too much fighting,” one woman said. “There was more than 100 kids the other day; they beat on a girl about 14 years old.” A middle-aged man asked: “Why are they hanging out in crowds on the corners? No one does anything about it. Can’t you arrest them for loitering?” These citizens know that violence can erupt out of street chaos. A 2015 Quinnipiac poll found that 61 percent of black voters in New York City wanted the police to “issue summonses or make arrests” in their neighborhood for quality-of-life offenses, more than white voters asked the same question. Back at the 41st Precinct, the president of a local mentoring program begged for a police watchtower in his neighborhood. Whenever he hears gunfire, he said, he runs toward the shooting, terrified that one of his three children has been struck. If the police go away, these law-abiding people will feel abandoned, and rightly so.

The claim that better-funded social services can deliver public safety is baseless. New York City tried that experiment for decades, and it was a resounding failure. No city spent more on welfare, yet crime continued to rise. Only Compstat policing reversed the chronic lawlessness of New York.

It is equally preposterous to say that social services are underfunded. The city spends a whopping $8.2 billion on social services, constituting more than 8 percent of the city’s budget, and that sum does not include all the social workers larded throughout the Department of Education. Government workers cannot substitute for the two-parent family in teaching children discipline and self-control. When parents are absent in their children’s lives, police are the second-best solution to crime—the only other one proven to work.

Fewer cops and depleted NYPD funding mean longer response times and less training. Cops who cannot get back-up quickly when confronting a violently resisting suspect are more likely to escalate their own use of force. Officers are desperate for more hands-on tactical and de-escalation training. What they don’t need is implicit-bias training, which is an insult to their intelligence and street knowledge.

Retrieved October 10, 2020 from https://www.city-journal.org/why-we-need-the-police

Be well everyone, and pray the old school rosary in the old school way, see https://catholiceye.wordpress.com//?s=15+decade+rosary&search=Go

____________________

David H. Lukenbill, President, The Lampstand Foundation                                                                     

Post Office Box 254794   Sacramento, CA 95865-4794

Website: https://davidhlukenbill.wordpress.com/                                                

Blog: www.catholiceye.wordpress.com  

E-Mail: Dlukenbill@msn.com

With Peter to Christ through Mary

Gunfighter World, Criminal Survival, No. 164, September 16, 2020

The theme of the American frontier birthing the American character runs potently through American literature and is perhaps no more potent than in Western films.

From James Fenimore Cooper, through Zane Grey and Louis L’Amour, and etched deeply within my cohort of professional criminals (those who commit crimes for money, have served time in maximum security prisons, and are neither an informer nor sex offender) by Western—and their cousins, the gangster—films, the struggle for survival by the lone individual against an oppressive world and the eventual and gloriously transcendent victory or bloody though honorable defeat, brings great solace to our troubled souls.

Richard Slotkin describes the emerging and very American perspective of ‘the arts’ of violence as poetic within the birth of the outlaw/gunfighter mythic template:

“In the postwar decade two variations on the “town-tamer” and “outlaw” Western emerged: the “psychological” or film noir Western, in which pathological elements in the hero’s character are emphasized at the expense of his character as lawman or social rebel: and the “gunfighter” Western, in which professionalism in the arts of violence is the hero’s defining characteristic. These new takes on the Western were shaped by the internal logic of genre development, which fostered a certain kind of stylization of the Western and its hero, and by the pressures and anxieties of the postwar/Cold War transition, which gave that stylization a particular kind of ideological significance. The consonance between the formal character of the gunfighter Western and its ideological content is a genuinely poetic achievement. It gave the gunfighter films ideological and cinematic resonance and made the heroic style of the gunfighter an important symbol of right and heroic action for filmmakers, the public, and the nation’s political leadership. (pp. 379-380)

Richard Slotkin. (1992). Gunfighter Nation: The Myth of the Frontier in Twentieth-Century America. Atheneum: New York.

“This poetic violence is further reinforced through many films, but most potently in those directed by Sam Peckinpaugh—The Wild Bunch being memorable—films dearly beloved by professional criminals and for whom the heroic aspects of the frontier mythology has been incorporated into the carceral/criminal culture from the larger American political culture; a culture also noted by Slotkin in the political campaign of JFK:

“For Kennedy and his advisors, the choice of the “Frontier” as symbol was not simply a device for trade-marking the candidate. It was an authentic metaphor, descriptive of the way in which they hoped to use political power and the kinds of struggle in which they hoped to engage. The “Frontier” was for them a completely resonant symbol, a vivid and memorable set of hero-tales—each a model of successful and morally justifying action on the stage of historical conflict. (Ibid. p. 3)

 “Deepening resonance, religion is present as noted in the article, The New Testament Mythology of James Fenimore Cooper:

“Indeed, what Cooper—probably subconsciously—recognized was that an “American Adam,” was not quite as compelling without an ‘American Jesus’ to clear the way. For Americans to construct a “passing away” of Native American civilization they were best served by a godly character that could function as a “sponge” for their sins, who could then disappear into the sublime. In this manner the people of the United States, who not incidentally at this very moment were undergoing religious evangelical revivals, could become a Christian nation with Native Americans playing the role of the old people of Israel who, tragically, could not adhere to the teachings of Christian civilization. In mythological terms it proved far more useful for the Daniel Boone mold of the stoic frontiersman to disappear from the scene rather than function as the offspring of American civilization. In this vein, the white pioneers that would start American civilization were more of the Peter and Paul variety than in the mold of Adam or Abraham, as some literary scholars have had it. This was the synthesis of providential nationalism and romantic language that two decades later would become known as “Manifest Destiny.”

Retrieved August 27, 2020 from https://s-usih.org/2017/02/the-new-testament-mythology-of-james-fenimore-cooper/

The professional criminal survives, emotionally and morally, within these parameters as shaped within the carceral/criminal world.

Finally, a new study, as reported by Daily Mail, indicates how persistent the personality traits from the frontier remain:

“People who lived hundreds of years ago during the ‘Wild West’ era have been called inquisitive, restless, dominant and inventive – and a new study reveals remnants of this pioneer personality still exists today.

“Using an algorithm, researchers at the University of Cambridge found those living in mountainous areas have distinct blend of traits that fits with ‘frontier settlement theory’.

“These individuals tend to be less trusting and forgiving, traits known to benefit territorial, self-focused survival strategies that helped early settlers survive the unknown and rugged terrain.”

Retrieved September 7, 2020 from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8706985/Wild-West-mentality-early-American-deemed-rebels-todays-population.html

Another story, from the magazine Scientific American with a little different focus, reports on the study, see at https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mountain-peaks-seem-to-shape-personality-traits-in-the-american-west/

Be well everyone, and pray the old school rosary in the old school way, see https://catholiceye.wordpress.com//?s=15+decade+rosary&search=Go

____________________

David H. Lukenbill, President, The Lampstand Foundation                                                                                    

Post Office Box 254794   Sacramento, CA 95865-4794

Website: https://davidhlukenbill.wordpress.com/                                                

Blog: www.catholiceye.wordpress.com  

E-Mail: Dlukenbill@msn.com

With Peter to Christ through Mary

No. 163, August 16, 2020

This website is the home site of my criminal reformation apostolate; here you can find details about the Lampstand Foundation which I founded as a 501c (3) nonprofit corporation in Sacramento, California in 2003.

I have written twelve books, one being about Lampstand and each one of the other eleven being  a response to a likely objection to Catholicism that will be encountered when doing ministry to professional criminals; and for links to all of the Lampstand books which are available—free to members—and at Amazon, go to http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=david+h+lukenbill

I also maintain a daily blog, The Catholic Eye, https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/

Lampstand also keeps track of rehabilitative programs that fail, and the one or two that appear to work, with the findings available at https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/evaluation-of-reentry-programs-3/

The work connected to the apostolate is listed under the home page categories (to your left) which I will be expanding as needed.

________

Proactive Policing

__________________________

According to this article from City Journal, and anyone with historical perspective and the common sense that usually accompanies it, proactive policing works.

An excerpt.

“Many advocates of “defunding the police” contend that too many police encounters with civilians concern trivial matters. Defunding proponents worry that poor decisions by officers can escalate tensions and lead to unnecessary uses of force. They argue that the police mandate should be more narrowly focused on responding to “serious” crimes, especially violent felonies. All other matters should not be considered police business. This premise has gained a receptive hearing in our political climate. Most people instinctively support the idea of leaving management of serious felonies to the police, who are certainly less likely to get into trouble if their job is simply to arrest violent felons.

“But American policing has tried this idea before, and the results were disastrous for communities and police agencies alike. If history is any guide, confining police focus to serious crimes will do little to manage those offenses—and the strategy may further damage the relationship between police and citizens.

“In the early 1900s, American policing was in turmoil. Political patronage largely determined which officers were hired, fired, and promoted. Officers themselves were often underqualified, poorly trained, and inadequately supervised. The mid-twentieth century saw a wave of policing reforms across the United States. Reformers sought to remove corrupting influences and to professionalize police with a more specific mandate. Thus was born the image of the “professional crime fighter”—the impartial law enforcement officer, objectively remote from citizens, who could bring to justice those accused of serious crimes. Radio cars, the 911 system, and “rapid response” emerged as the primary means to carry out this narrowly defined mission, which contained within it the seeds of future problems. “Police business” meant serious crime, and “real police work” meant patrolling in cars, waiting for calls about felonies in progress. Officers were discouraged from paying attention to minor disorder and other community problems. Citizen requests for assistance with such issues were thus easily ignored, dismissed as “social work,” or hastily (and ineffectually) handled.

“The image of police departments improved somewhat in the postwar years. The introduction of the civil-service system and similar mechanisms helped to lessen political and other corrupting influences on officers. Standards were toughened for recruitment, training, and supervision. Despite its new image, though, policing during this era generally failed at meeting community public-safety needs. The professionally remote law enforcement officer, now accountable more to the government than to the citizenry, often came across as aloof, uninterested in community problems. Tensions ran high between officers and citizens, especially in minority neighborhoods.

“Many critics attribute these tensions to over-policing, such as the use of unnecessary or excessive force by officers, but under-policing contributed to the problem, too. Police simply failed to take seriously many community problems that fell short of their felonious-crime mandate. They essentially abandoned residents to disorderly conditions and behaviors in neighborhoods, rarely engaging citizens unless called upon to address “serious” crime.

“And despite their focus on serious crime, the police largely failed to control it: rates of crime and violence soared from the 1960s through the 1980s. The focus on serious offenses placed police in a reactive mode, contributing to the decline in safety. It’s extraordinarily rare for police on routine patrol to come upon felonies in progress; cops rely heavily on citizens to report serious crimes. And, for reasons usually related to delays in reporting, the speed of an officer’s response makes a difference in only a very small number of cases. For most calls related to serious crimes, the perpetrator is no longer at the location when the police arrive; the best that an officer can do is gather evidence from the scene and interview victims or witnesses. A significant body of research over the past 40 years has demonstrated that reactive policing is mostly ineffective at preventing crime and violence.

“Research is equally clear that police can be successful at crime management when they use the proactive tactics associated with community policing to reduce crime and make citizens feel safer. Among others, these tactics include managing disorder while patrolling in localized crime “hot spots”; paying attention to minor offenses that are often precursors to serious crimes; identifying and working with those at the highest risk of violence; helping citizens with problem-solving and crime-prevention exercises; patrolling on foot and bicycle; and partnering with mental-health and social-service counselors on co-response efforts. Many of these methods do not focus directly on serious offenses, though the reduction or prevention of criminal activity may be the ultimate goal. Some are implemented in response to community requests for police assistance in helping to maintain quality of life in neighborhoods; others are designed to address underlying causes of community problems that can lead to serious crime.

“Research and practice demonstrate that community crime problems are specific to individual locations; there is no “one size fits all” technique that works all the time or everywhere. Proactive tactics work best when designed in partnership with the communities where they are implemented. These methods are entirely consistent with core community-policing principles, which emphasize police accountability to local neighborhoods and police-citizen collaboration.

“Countering the narrative advanced by many defunding advocates, most people—of all races and ethnicities—want to see more police in their neighborhoods, not fewer. In fact, residents of poor urban communities affected by crime and disorder are often the strongest supporters of community policing. At the same time, citizens demand that officers perform their tasks fairly, legally, and without prejudice. Police training and policies must emphasize the proper use of discretion, and officers must be held to high standards of accountability in order to maintain trust between police and the community.

“It’s true that police are called on to address many difficult societal problems that don’t fall under the umbrella of “serious crime,” including loud music, graffiti, littering, public alcohol and drug use, and loitering associated with street-level drug dealing and prostitution. But directing officers to ignore these “minor” violations divorces the police from mutually desirable connections with the citizenry, reduces responsiveness to neighborhood complaints and concerns, and takes away vital tools for understanding the community and managing public safety.”

Retrieved July 31, 2020 from https://www.city-journal.org/community-based-proactive-policing-works

Be well everyone, and pray the old school rosary in the old school way, see https://catholiceye.wordpress.com//?s=15+decade+rosary&search=Go

____________________

David H. Lukenbill, President, The Lampstand Foundation                                                                                    

Post Office Box 254794   Sacramento, CA 95865-4794

Website: https://davidhlukenbill.wordpress.com/                                                

Blog: www.catholiceye.wordpress.com  

E-Mail: Dlukenbill@msn.com

With Peter to Christ through Mary

This website is the home site of my criminal reformation apostolate; here you can find details about the Lampstand Foundation which I founded as a 501c (3) nonprofit corporation in Sacramento, California in 2003.

I have written twelve books, one being about Lampstand and each one of the other eleven being  a response to a likely objection to Catholicism that will be encountered when doing ministry to professional criminals; and for links to all of the Lampstand books which are available—free to members—and at Amazon, go to http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=david+h+lukenbill

I also maintain a daily blog, The Catholic Eye, https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/

Lampstand also keeps track of rehabilitative programs that fail, and the one or two that appear to work, with the findings available at https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/evaluation-of-reentry-programs-3/

The work connected to the apostolate is listed under the home page categories (to your left) which I will be expanding as needed.

________

The Lampstand Foundation E-Letter:

No. 162, July 16, 2020

__________________________

Some Catholic History

__________________________

This is a brilliant piece by Roberto de Mattei, one of the most astute Catholic historians, posted at Rorate Caeli.

The article.

“On his blog Settimo Cielo of July 13, the Vatican reporter Sandro Magister was highly critical of Bishops Carlo Maria Viganò and Athanasius Schneider, hurling an accusation at them for spreading “fake news”. *

“The term “fake news” was used also in reference to Monsignor Schneider’s theses, whereby the Church, in Her history, has corrected doctrinal errors committed by precedent ecumenical councils, without, in this manner, “undermining the foundations of the Catholic faith.” Magister accuses Schneider of historical incompetence, citing, as evidence, a brief intervention by Cardinal Walter Brandmüller on the Council of Constance, which in reality refutes nothing of what was affirmed by Monsignor Schneider.

“The facts are these. On April 6, 1415, the Council of Constance issued a decree known as Haec Sancta 1, wherein it was stated solemnly that the Council, assisted by the Holy Spirit, received its power directly from God: hence every Christian, including the Pope, was required to obey it. Haec Sancta is a revolutionary document which raised many questions as it was first interpreted in continuity with Tradition and, subsequently, reprobated by the Pontifical Magisterium.  It had its coherent application in the decree Frequens, of October 9, 1417, which called for a Council five years later, after seven years another one and then one every ten years, de facto attributing to the Council the function of a permanent collegial body, alongside the Pope and de facto superior to him.

“Cardinal Brandmüller notes that: “the assize which issued those decrees was in no way an ecumenical council authorized to define the doctrine of the faith. It was, instead, merely an assembly of  the followers of John XXIII (Baldassarre Cossa),one of the three “popes” contending at that time for the leadership of the Church. That assembly had no authority. The schism lasted until the council of Constance unified with the other two parties, i.e. the followers of Gregory XII (Angelo Correr) and the ‘natio hispanica’ of Benedict XIII (Pedro Martinez de Luna),an event that occurred in the autumn of 1417. Only then did the ‘council’ of Constance become a true ecumenical council, even if still without a pope, who eventually was then elected.”

“All true, but Martin V , elected ‘the true’ Pope in Constance on November 11, 1417, in the Bull Inter cunctas of February 22, 1418, acknowledged the ecumenical nature of the Council of Constance and all that it had decided in the previous years, albeit with a generically restrictive formula: «in favorem fidei et salutem animarum». 2  He therefore did not repudiate Haec Sancta and applied the decree Frequens with rigour, fixing the date of a new general Council, which was held in Pavia-Siena (1423-1424) and the city of Basil he designated as the seat of the subsequent assembly.

“The Council was opened in Basil on July 23, 1431. Martin V’s successor, Eugene IV, with the Bull Duduum Sacrum of December 15 1433, ratified the documents that the assembly had issued hitherto, among which was the Haec Sancta the “conciliar”  Fathers of Basil had proclaimed as their magna charta.

“Eugene IV, in the Decree of the Council of Florence, which on September 4, 1439, condemned the Fathers of Basil, “to save” the Council of Constance, resorted to that, which, in modern terms might be defined a “hermeneutic of continuity”  today used with regard to the Second Vatican Council. He, in fact, sustained that the proposition of the superiority of the Councils over the Pope, affirmed by the Fathers of Basil on the basis of Haec Sancta, was “a bad interpretation (pravum intellectum), made by the Basilians, which de facto reveals itself to be contrary to the authentic sense of Holy Scripture, of the Holy Fathers and of the Council of Constance itself.”3 The Fathers of Basil, according to the Pope “interpreted the declaration of the Council of Constance in a wicked and reprehensible sense, totally alien to sound doctrine.4 Today we would say: an abusive interpretation of the Second Vatican Council, distorting the documents.

“Subsequently, in the letter Etsi dubitemus of April 21 1441, Eugene IV condemned the “diabolical founders” of the conciliarism doctrine: Marsilius of Padova, John of Jandun and William of Ockham 5 , but regarding Haec Sancta he took a hesitant stance, along the lines of the “hermeneutic of continuity”.  The same Eugene IV ratified the Council of Constance in its entirety, and its decrees, «absque tamen praejudicio juris, dignitatis et praeminentiae Sedis apostolicae» as he writes on July 22, 1336 to his legate: a formula that clarified the sense of Martin V’s restriction, condemning implicitly, in the name of the Primacy of the Roman Pontiff, all those who referred to the Council of Constance in  affirming the superiority of the council over the Pope.

“Consequently the thesis of “continuity” between Haec Sancta and the Tradition of the Church was abandoned by theologians and historians, and among them Cardinal Brandmüller, who rightly expunges Haec Sancta and the decree Frequens from the Tradition of the Church. Even at the time of the Counter-Reform, Father Melchor Cano states that Haec Sancta should be rejected as it did not have the dogmatic form of a “decree obliging the faithful to believe or condemn the contrary”6 .  Similarly, Cardinal Baudrillart, in the Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, retains that the Council of Constance, in issuing Haec Sancta did not have the intention of promulgating a dogmatic definition, and it is also for this the document was subsequently repudiated by the Church.7  The Church historian August Franzen affirms the same.8  Thereby, in raising the question of the ecumenical nature of the Council of Constance, Father Joseph Gill one of its foremost experts, writes that: «les historiens s’accordent à le considérer comme oecuménique, mais dans des proportions variables».”

“Why exclude then that a day will come when even the Second Vatican Council may be repudiated, in part, or en bloc, as happened with the Council of Constance and its decrees?”

Retrieved July 15, 2020 from https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/07/de-mattei-fake-news-no-historical-truth.html#more

Be well everyone, and pray the old school rosary in the old school way, see https://catholiceye.wordpress.com//?s=15+decade+rosary&search=Go

____________________

David H. Lukenbill, President, The Lampstand Foundation                                                                                   

Post Office Box 254794   Sacramento, CA 95865-4794

Website: https://davidhlukenbill.wordpress.com/                                                

Blog: www.catholiceye.wordpress.com  

E-Mail: Dlukenbill@msn.com

With Peter to Christ through Mary

No. 161, June 16, 2020

This website is the home site of my criminal reformation apostolate; here you can find details about the Lampstand Foundation which I founded as a 501c (3) nonprofit corporation in Sacramento, California in 2003.

I have written twelve books, one being about Lampstand and each one of the other eleven being  a response to a likely objection to Catholicism that will be encountered when doing ministry to professional criminals; and for links to all of the Lampstand books which are available—free to members—and at Amazon, go to http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=david+h+lukenbill

I also maintain a daily blog, The Catholic Eye, https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/

Lampstand also keeps track of rehabilitative programs that fail, and the one or two that appear to work, with the findings available at https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/evaluation-of-reentry-programs-3/

The work connected to the apostolate is listed under the home page categories (to your left) which I will be expanding as needed.

________

The Lampstand E Letter, Old Testament Foundation

__________________________

Crazy times right now and here’s a good article from City Journal with more about the racial aspects, https://www.city-journal.org/racism-is-an-empty-thesis

That being said, let’s look at one of the sources of our faith, the Old Testament foundations.

Over the past several decades there has been a walking away—by the leaders of the institutional church—from the ancient foundation of our faith, the Old Testament and its many covenants direct from God to Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the clear denunciations against murder, betrayal, and harming the young.

Among the people, one senses these covenants are still real and obeyed.

In our last newsletter we examined the uncertainty of the prophetic words of Isaiah about the coming of Christ as expressed in the commentary of Chapter 11, considered by most as:

“The oracle of the “shoot” from “the stump of Jesse” (Is 11:1-16) is the longest and most detailed prophecy of the coming royal son and in many ways is the messianic prophecy par excellence in the book of Isaiah.” (p. 729) John Bergsma & Brant Pitre. (2018). A Catholic Introduction to the Bible: The Old Testament. Ignatius Press: San Francisco.

But in the commentary of the New American Bible, it notes: “The oracle does not seem to have a particular historical person in mind.” http://usccb.org/bible/isaiah/11

We all know the ancient words of the Lord concerning murder in Genesis 9:6: “Whosoever shall shed man’s blood, his blood shall be shed: for man was made to the image of God.”

Sadly, this has been challenged by many church leaders to the point that the current pope has said capital punishment is abolished within Catholic teaching.

Challenging the Old Testament, the foundation of the Church’s teaching, whether the ancient covenants or the prophecy’s, challenges the very foundation of the Church herself, though the teaching of the Development of Doctrine by St. John Henry Newman must certainly be considered here.

Be well everyone, and pray the old school rosary in the old school way, see https://catholiceye.wordpress.com//?s=15+decade+rosary&search=Go

____________________

David H. Lukenbill, President, The Lampstand Foundation                                                                                   

Post Office Box 254794   Sacramento, CA 95865-4794

Website: https://davidhlukenbill.wordpress.com/                                                

Blog: www.catholiceye.wordpress.com  

E-Mail: Dlukenbill@msn.com

With Peter to Christ through Mary

No. 160, May 16, 2020

Holy Queen Mother’s House

This is a tradition I had not been aware of until recently, the transportation of her house from Nazareth to Loreto.

God has performed many miracles, some for our education, and some, like this one, to allow us to know, forever, the birth home of the Lord and the Holy Family.

An excellent article about it by Dr. Carol Byrne, comes to us from Tradition in Action.

An excerpt.

“Myth still tends to be associated with the Loreto tradition, and accusations are rife in the modern era that it was a pure invention, impossible to reconcile with the nature of historical reality. This was the position of the 20^th century modernists who acted on the assumption that miracles should not be taken into account if we are setting out to do “scholarly” work on past events and determine their historicity. And it is still the prevalent view among progressivist Catholics today.

“But, in cutting themselves off from the supernatural sources of divine intervention, they also severed any ties to what is most true about the world of reality, which they claim they can explain to others.

“The main charge – falsely levelled against the Loreto tradition – was that of credulity on the part of those who accepted it in the absence of reasonable proof or knowledge. To defend the tradition, we will show that there are grounds for both a truly Catholic and intellectually respectable belief that the Holy House was transported miraculously from Nazareth, with various stops along the way, to Loreto.

“In the first place, it is necessary to accept that it is possible for God to operate outside the laws that govern the physical world without violating the natural order; and that the miracles He wills to perform are not contrary to nature but above and beyond nature. Once that fundamental point is accepted, we move on to the inescapable conclusion that the possibility of such an event happening cannot be regarded as absurd by anyone who believes in Divine Providence and the ministry of Angels.

“We will proceed in our enquiry on the basis that this tradition has a claim to serious consideration, especially by Catholics.

“Let us consider the following facts that constitute convincing evidence for the authenticity of the miraculous translocations of the Holy House at the end of the 13^th century:

• Oral testimonies approved by the Church less than 20 years after the arrival of the Holy House in Loreto;
• The testimony of the innumerable miracles wrought in the Holy House and the Divine favors granted there;
• An unbroken tradition of acceptance by the Catholic world for over 700 years;
• The devotion of hundreds of Saints (1) and countless pilgrims who visited the site;
• Scholarly evaluation of the historical records;
• Valid scientific evidence obtained from expert analysis of the fabric of the Holy House proving its origin in Palestine and the impossibility of its being rebuilt in Loreto;
• Statements of over 40 Roman Pontiffs in official documents declaring the identity of the Holy House of Nazareth and that of Loreto, and granting indulgences to pilgrims;
• The concession of a Proper Office and Mass in 1699.”

Retrieved April 7, 2020 from https://traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f184_Dialogue_93.htm

Be well everyone, and pray the old school rosary in the old school way, see https://catholiceye.wordpress.com//?s=15+decade+rosary&search=Go

No. 159, April 16, 2020, Fatima, Russia & the Universal Church

This website is the home site of my criminal reformation apostolate; here you can find details about the Lampstand Foundation which I founded as a 501c (3) nonprofit corporation in Sacramento, California in 2003.

I have written twelve books, one being about Lampstand and each one of the other eleven being  a response to a likely objection to Catholicism that will be encountered when doing ministry to professional criminals; and for links to all of the Lampstand books which are available—free to members—and at Amazon, go to http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=david+h+lukenbill

I also maintain a daily blog, The Catholic Eye, https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/

Lampstand also keeps track of rehabilitative programs that fail, and the one or two that appear to work, with the findings available at https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/evaluation-of-reentry-programs-3/

The work connected to the apostolate is listed under the home page categories (to your left) which I will be expanding as needed.

________

The Lampstand Foundation E-Letter

Fatima, Russia & the Universal Church

The Consecration of Russia which Our Lady of Fatima called upon the Catholic Church—the pope and all the bishops in concert—to do has not been done, though over 100 years have passed since.

Part of why the Consecration of Russia was so important is foretold in the marvelous book by Vladimir Soloviev.

Who is Vladimir Soloviev? (b. 1853, d. 1900)

In the preface to the new 2013 edition of Soloviev’s book, Russia and the Universal Church, William G. von Peters, Ph. D writes:

“Lenin considered him the enemy…After the Revolution Soloviev was banned from the libraries of the Soviet Union; as well as in Soviet occupied Eastern Europe after WWII”…

“The Blessed Virgin appeared to him three times during his life and set him upon his life’s mission. This mission, which gradually unfolded for him, was that of the reunion of the Russian Orthodox Church with the Catholic Church”…

“Hans Urs von Baltasar, considered one of the most important Roman Catholic theologians of the 20^th Century, ranked Soloviev as only second to St. Thomas Aquinas, as “the greatest artist of order and organization in the history of though.” (pp. iv-v)

“It is a fact that in 1890, four years before his early death, he was received into the Catholic Church…”

“Near the end of his profession of Faith, Soloviev presciently recalled the voices from the West and East that had urged reconciliation. Their prayers, he said, needed “only a simple amen from the Eastern Slavs.”

“Soloviev prophetically announced, “I come to speak this amen, in the name of a hundred million Russian Christians, in firm and full confidence that they will not repudiate me.”

“His prayer was heard and ratified by heaven, with the Blessed Virgin appearing at Fatima in 1917 asking the Pope to pray for the conversion of Russia, promising the help of heaven, stating that the conversion of Russia will be accomplished, though late.”

Vladimir Soloviev. (2013 edition by William G. von Peters, Ph.D.). Russia and the Universal Church. Catholic Resources: Chattanooga.

The importance lies in the fact that millions wanted to remain a Christian country rather than a Communist one—as is true today—and had the Consecration of Russia taken place as called for by the Holy Mother, Vladimir Soloviev would have played a much more important role in the history of Russia than Lenin.

Be well everyone, and pray the old school rosary in the old school way, see https://catholiceye.wordpress.com//?s=15+decade+rosary&search=Go

____________________

David H. Lukenbill, President, The Lampstand Foundation                                                                                   

Post Office Box 254794   Sacramento, CA 95865-4794

Website: https://davidhlukenbill.wordpress.com/                                                

Blog: www.cathliceye.wordpress.com  

E-Mail: Dlukenbill@msn.com

With Peter to Christ through Mary

This website is the home site of my criminal reformation apostolate; here you can find details about the Lampstand Foundation which I founded as a 501c (3) nonprofit corporation in Sacramento, California in 2003.

I have written twelve books, one being about Lampstand and each one of the other eleven being  a response to a likely objection to Catholicism that will be encountered when doing ministry to professional criminals; and for links to all of the Lampstand books which are available—free to members—and at Amazon, go to http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=david+h+lukenbill

I also maintain a daily blog, The Catholic Eye, https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/

Lampstand also keeps track of rehabilitative programs that fail, and the one or two that appear to work, with the findings available at https://catholiceye.wordpress.com/2011/11/07/evaluation-of-reentry-programs-3/

The work connected to the apostolate is listed under the home page categories (to your left) which I will be expanding as needed.

________

Lampstand E Letter: No. 158, March 13, 2020,

Excellent Article on Virus

“Coronavirus: Facts vs. Panic

“Separating facts from irrational fear in the global virus pandemic.

By Sharyl Attkisson

Last Updated:
March 13, 2020 – 1:12pm

“Coronavirus is nothing to sneeze at. But so far, widespread panic may not be justified.

“You should know:

• Almost all of the reported coronavirus deaths in the U.S. happened in long-term care facilities in Washington State. And almost all of those occurred at the same facility.
• Most people who get coronavirus have mild or no symptoms.
• No young or middle-age people have died of coronavirus in the U.S. 
• Most around the world diagnosed from January-March 1 have already recovered.

“Obviously, this is a fast-moving news target. For the latest information from the government, you can visit the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) coronavirus page at CDC.gov. The following information is accurate as of Thursday.

“Q: What is the average American’s risk of getting coronavirus?

“A: Low. CDC reports: “For the majority of people, the immediate risk of being exposed to the virus that causes COVID-19 is thought to be low.”

“Q: What’s the likelihood that coronavirus is in my community?

“A: Low. CDC reports: “There is not widespread circulation in most communities in the United States.”

“Q: How many coronavirus deaths have there been in the U.S.?

“A: So far, not many. CDC reports 36 deaths. Adding various news reports, the number could be about 40 and growing. Although one death is too many, the reported deaths are among 43 states (including the District of Columbia) reporting outbreaks since January in a population of more than 327 million people.

“Q: How many young people have died of coronavirus in the U.S.?

“A: So far, there are no reports of deaths among young people in the U.S. The U.S. Surgeon General reports the average age of people who have died from coronavirus in the U.S. is 80. Additionally, he says those who are most impacted have chronic, serious health problems such as heart disease, diabetes, and lung disease.

“Q: Who has died so far?

“A. These were compiled using CDC reports plus news and local health department reports: 

• 31 Washington State elderly. That includes 27 in King County, (22 at the same elderly nursing facility in Kirkland), three in Snohomish county, and one in Grant County, a patient in their 80s.
• Four California elderly: A woman in assisted living in her 90s, a hospitalized woman Santa Clara in her 60s, an “elderly man” in assisted living, and a 71-year-old man with underlying health conditions who’d been on a Grand Princess cruise ship. 
• Two Florida residents in their 70s who had traveled overseas. 
• One New Jersey diabetic man, 69, who suffered two cardiac arrests. 
• One South Dakota man aged 60-69, with “underlying medical conditions”
• One Georgia man, 67, with “underlying medical conditions”

“Q: How many people have recovered?

“A: News reports say that in China alone, out of 80,000 diagnosed, nearly 60,000 have already recovered. However, the true number of recovered is likely far higher since most of those who get the virus have mild or no symptoms, and so are not diagnosed at all.

“Q: Why have there been so many coronavirus deaths in Italy?

“A: Italy has reported 827 coronavirus deaths. Experts say the high number is partly because Italy has more residents in the vulnerable age category. Italy has the oldest population in Europe and more elderly per capita than the U.S. Most of the Italian deaths are in patients in their 80s and 90s. In addition, Italy has a great number of direct China contacts. Italy was the first to join China’s “silk road” economic partnership project. The coronavirus is believed to have originated in China. Italy’s 827 deaths are out of a population of 60 million people. Even though one death is too many, it is still a small relative number.

“Q: Why am I hearing so many different fatality rates?

“A: Experts say all coronavirus death rates are nothing more than estimates at the moment. That’s because it is impossible to know how many people have or had the virus. And that total number is needed to calculate an accurate rate. What makes it more difficult is the fact that most people have few or no symptoms, and so it is impossible to count them.

“Some current death rates that sound high are being calculated in a particular age group. The rate will be highest among the elderly and, in the U.S., there have been zero deaths among people age 50 and under. Some death rates are being calculated as deaths among the sickest patients, those are diagnosed and treated, which will produce a much higher number than a more accurate death rate that takes into consideration those patients who are infected but do not become ill at all.”

Retrieved March 13, 2020 from https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/health/coronavirus-facts-vs-panic

____________________

David H. Lukenbill, President, The Lampstand Foundation                                                                                   

Post Office Box 254794   Sacramento, CA 95865-4794

Website: https://davidhlukenbill.wordpress.com/                                                

Blog: www.cathliceye.wordpress.com  

E-Mail: Dlukenbill@msn.com

With Peter to Christ through Mary