A "NO" ON THE SCHOOL BUDGET IS A VOTE FOR CHANGE

"If we value independence, if we are disturbed by the growing conformity of knowledge, of values, of attitudes, which our present system induces, then we may wish to set up conditions of learning which make for uniqueness, for self-direction, and for self-initiated learning".....Carl Rogers

It's not easy as a school board member to say I don’t support our budget, but the choice is made clear when it’s a budget that shortchanges our students and places too much of a financial burden on the taxpayers which I feel is the case with this budget.

Approximately 85% of our budget is made up of employee salaries and benefits. We are now paying for an egregious teacher contract settlement of more than 18% over 4 years. We are also paying for an additional assistant superintendent that cost us an additional $110,000 in salary and added dollars in benefits. Approximately $600,000 that should have gone towards our educational programs will be shelled out for pension payback. If the largest piece of the budget is salaries and entitlements, what's left for our students? Scraps as far I'm concerned. And where does it leave the taxpayers? With another property tax increase they can ill afford.

How, then, can our Superintendent and Board continue to defend the hiring of an additional central office administrator? How can they defend the recent teacher contract settlement as fair to all parties? In my opinion, to defend these expenditures and claim the outcome of these actions do not compromise the education of our students and the financial well-being of our taxpayers is disingenuous to say the least.

I’ve no doubt in my mind our administrators, our board members, and everyone in the school district and community all want the same thing for our students - to provide them with the greatest opportunity for an excellent education. But I feel there's an unwillingness by the school board and central office administration to take responsibility for our budget and a resistance to change the way we do business.

I understand there are variables and issues that make our job difficult, but we can’t keep pointing the finger of blame elsewhere and complaining about the cards we’ve been dealt with. This is our budget and we have to start taking responsibility for it. The public is tired of hearing a litany of excuses and who can blame them? If we're going to gain public support, we certainly can’t keep placing our bureaucratic and governmental missteps and blunders on the backs of the taxpayers - they’re tapped out.

The school board and administration have to let go of conventional practices and start thinking out of the box. Dire situations call for bold measures. We can’t expect our vision of a 21st century education to become a reality by using 20th century financial planning.

The school board also needs to be proactive by reaching out to our local municipal governing body, state legislators, other school districts, and the community and work together to find solutions because we're in this together. Everyone working in the school system has to start asking themselves what they can do, what part they can play, to work towards the common goal of balancing our educational mission at a cost the taxpayers can afford. But it starts at the top. There can be no more excuses. We need to take responsibility and a course of action that will make the needed changes happen.

In his recent letter to the editor in the Daily Record, Mr. Bednarcik stated his reasons why the children of Roxbury need us to vote "yes" on the school budget. He asserted that education is a town's "major industry" and "a budget rejection is neither the positive example needed for youth, nor in the best interests of the community".

What we need to recognize is these are not normal times and even those running the major industry of education have the obligation to analyze their resources and rethink how to best spend their time and money. By conducting business as usual and asking voters to approve a budget with a tax levy increase of over 6% during a very difficult economic crisis is just plain irresponsible. In my opinion, it's the Roxbury school board who should be looked upon as failing in it's obligation to set a positive example for our students and keeping the best interests of the community in mind.

As a nation of people we are, by and large, highly educated and hard-working, yet here we are left in an economic mess that’s compromised our country’s solvency, it’s ideals and values, and in turn, our children’s future. Why? We read and hear the answer to that question every day - far too many have chosen a path of greed and self-interest instead of working for the greater good. This begs the questions: have we learned from our mistakes and are we doing all we should be doing to turn things around? It’s evident in the Roxbury school district the answer to both those questions is NO.

Though undoubtedly our teachers have continually done an excellent job producing literate, confident, capable students, are our children learning to do the right thing as the leaders of tomorrow? It's imperative they are taught to avoid the mistakes we’ve made and understand that, as capable citizens, they have a responsibility to their fellow man. This means making sacrifices during hard times and working together for a common purpose.

The children of Roxbury are watching and learning from us - the adults. Right now they do not need a "yes" vote on a bloated school budget that will only cause their families and community an additional financial burden. What they need is an invaluable lesson from the role models in their life about the honor and rewards that come from selflessness, sacrifice, and looking out for one another while persevering through tough times.

VOTE CASTRIOTTA AND ROGERS FOR ROXBURY SCHOOL BOARD

The following editorial endorsement and candidate profiles were published in the April 9th edition of the Roxbury Register:

"Castriotta is the most controversial of all of the board members, and we’re pretty sure she would be the first to admit that. She’s frequently at odds with her fellow board members, but that’s ok.At the very least, dialogue and discussion is encouraged as a result. And, she was also the only one who voted against what many felt- including us- was an excessive teacher’s raise this year, given the dire financial climate. She’s a lone voice often, but she also has been a supportive voice for the taxpayers, and nowhere was that more evident than on the teacher’s contract vote. That was particuarly important this year, and we know she expressed the sentiments of many with her "no" vote."


Maureen Castriotta

Castriotta, a resident of Landing for 20 years, was elected to the Roxbury Board of Education in April 2006.

“During my tenure on the board, I have faithfully and tirelessly worked to ensure all Roxbury students are provided with the best education possible at a cost the taxpayers can afford,” she said.

She said she has been an outspoken advocate for open government, parental and student rights, and school spending reform. She has kept up-to-date with the changing social, political, and legal issues challenging public education by completing the state mandated school board training and attending numerous education information sessions and state legislative forums covering diversified topics such as: student achievement, school finance, negotiations, core curriculum standards, the state’s high school redesign initiative, strategies for special education, school law, the superintendent search process, and shared services partnerships.

“For the last three years, I’ve served as a Roxbury school member committed to representing the interests of the community on public education issues. I’ve never been afraid to speak out and fight for the interests of the public, even when it’s unpopular with the bureaucrats. I believe now, more than ever, people are sick and tired of platitudes and empty rhetoric and are looking for straight talk from their leaders,” she said.

“I don’t have to tell you we’re living through extremely tough economic times. It has created circumstances that simply do not allow for business as usual in our school district. It’s definitely not the time to add unnecessary and non-essential payroll. As it is, the board has allowed our school district to turn into a job protection system with more focus on the employment of adults rather then the education of our children,” she said.

“What we need are board members with common sense and the backbone to make the hard choices. The board not only needs to be smart and put our money where it will do the most for the students, we need to make every effort to reign in spending to lighten the taxpayer’s load. I can tell you, as a board member, I’ve worked to that end,” she said.

“Unlike my co-board members, I stood up to excessive spending and didn’t hand over a blank check to our Superintendent,” she said.

“I was the only board member to vote against the hiring of two assistant superintendents to replace one at an added cost of $110,000 to the district. I was also the only board member who tried to hold the line on spending by voting against the teacher’s settlement of nearly a 20 percent increase over the length of a four year contract,” she said.

“It was an egregious settlement that I believe resulted in compromising the school budget and in turn, the educational experience of our students and the financial welfare of Roxbury residents,” she said.

“Needless to say, I do not support the proposed budget. Quite frankly, it’s plain irresponsible and shameful to ask Roxbury residents to approve a budget with a tax levy increase of more than six percent during a time we’re all struggling to survive a perilous economic crisis,” she said.

“Roxbury’s taxpayers should be getting the most bang for their education buck. There can be no more excuses on that,” she said.

Castriotta is the board’s liaison to the Roxbury Township Council and chairman of both the Facilities and Shared Services committees.

Castriotta has also served on the board’s Education, Finance, and Negotiations Committees as well as the Special Services Director Selection Committee, the Final Strategic Plan Sub-Committee, the 2008 Superintendent Search Planning Committee, and the Board Annual Calendar Committee.

Castriotta describes herself as a “longtime community, civic, and political activist, who volunteers her time and skills to various school and township committees and organizations including the school district’s PTAs, the high school’s athletic and performing arts programs, the Board of Education Key Communicators Committee, Project Graduation, the Roxbury Municipal Alliance Committee (ROMAC), Roxbury Township’s Economic Development Committee, and the township’s “Neighbors Helping Neighbor” program.

In addition, she is a founding member of the Roxbury Township Memorial Day Parade Committee established in 2003 and is a member of VFW Post 2833 Ladies Auxiliary.

A New York City native, Castriotta attended Hunter College as a Liberal Arts undergraduate student and in later years took course work in the honors program at the County College of Morris.

Castriotta and her husband Ralph, have been married for 33 years and have two daughters, Kelly, an attorney at a private law firm in New York City, and Courtney, a sales and marketing retail administrator and part-time dance teacher.


Chris Rogers

Originally from Mount Olive Township, Rogers has been a resident of Roxbury for nine years.

For the last five of those years, he has been employed by a local financial services company, holding positions in areas such as operations, sales and most recently, government compliance.

He and his wife, Loretta, have two children, one currently about to graduate from Roxbury High School, and one who is currently attending college.

He is a member of the Roxbury Municipal Alliance Committee, otherwise known as ROMAC, as the group’s volunteer webmaster.

Rogers has been an active critic of the Roxbury School Board for several years.

This is his third attempt to gain a seat on the school board.

“As a member of the public, over the last three years I have attended almost all of the scheduled school board meetings. I have been a vocal participant in most of those meetings, questioning spending items as they are about to be voted on. I have again decided to participate in this year’s school board election to continue my goal of bringing fiscal responsibility, greater administrative accountability and a much needed focus on educational excellence in our schools,” Rogers said.

“I know that it is possible for the Roxbury school district to spend less, while providing our kids with the tools they need to achieve more.”

“Year after year, many of us continue to send a message to the Roxbury school board that we will not tolerate excessive spending within our school budgets. Unfortunately, year after year, the majority of the school board members continue to put forth a larger and larger proposed budget, layering on additional administrators and giving huge pay increases to unionized employees, while continuing to take away the programs that impact our kids the most.”

When asked why he has not been successful in prior school board elections, Rogers said, “I have always felt my first priority was not winning an elected position. Instead, my first priority has been to bring attention to why our school district continues to experience a financial crisis,” he said.

“When you speak honestly about the financial problems within our school district, you cannot avoid mentioning the fact that union contracts are crippling the educational system. Some voters consider me to be negative to point this out. I do understand my comments might lose some voters who have a financial interest in how the district spends money.”

When asked to share his view on taxes, Rogers said, “I am not against taxes, as some of my opponents would have you believe. I am however, against wasteful spending. I understand that everyone in the community needs to pay their fair share of taxes to allow the community to operate. I insist that there should be much more involvement on the school board’s part to see that the district spends your money more wisely, especially on the 85 percent of the school budget that is considered fixed salaries and benefits,” he said.

“More people need to come forward and acknowledge that the teacher’s union contract is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. If the current school board cannot even recognize what their biggest problem is, our kids and their education will continue to be held hostage.”

“This year our superintendent and school board, while asking for a six percent increase over last year’s tax levy in the amount of 2.8 million dollars, continue to claim that the school district does not have enough money for core educational programs. However, this year alone the school district has layered on additional administrative staff and has provided a four year, 20 percent pay increase to Roxbury’s largest labor union,” he said.

“The claim of not having enough money does not seem to match the spending habits of this district.”

“A ‘no’ vote on this year’s budget is not anti-child. A no vote on this year’s budget is a vote for fiscal accountability. A defeated budget will then be reviewed by our town council, which will cut waste as they have done in previous years,” he said.

“Regardless of the school budget passing or failing, we will almost certainly still see greater than a four percent increase over last year’s budget. I will be voting no on this year’s school budget,” he added.

Rogers also shared his views on the recent creation of a new assistant superintendent position.

“During a time when most school districts are cutting costs in the area of administration, Roxbury is proposing to increase spending. How much more out of touch can our superintendent be? It is interesting to note that Superintendent (Michael) Rossi’s home town of Hackettstown, and former employer Lopatcong, are both currently reducing their school budget increases to provide taxpayer relief.”

“Under Dr. Rossi’s leadership, Roxbury will look for a 2.8 million dollar increase over last year’s budget.”

“I also believe that our district’s hiring practices should be based only on the qualifications of the applicants. The fact that one of our newly hired assistant superintendents was an elected school board member at the school district Dr. Rossi used to work for should outrage members of our community. All hiring should be based on what the applicant knows, not who they know.”

THE TIME HAS COME "TO DRAW THE LINE": MORE ON THE ROXBURY TEACHER CONTRACT SETTLEMENT

Here's another excellent editorial about the Roxbury Teacher Contract settlement...this one's from the Star-Ledger. It's followed by a one of the comments posted in response which I think represents how the vast majority of people view the teaching profession in the 21st century.

Roxbury is out step with teacher pay hike
Posted by The Star-Ledger Editorial Board January 30, 2009 5:30AM

Guess the recession hasn't hit Roxbury yet.

On Monday, in one of the state's first teacher contract agreements of the year, the township's board of education handed the district's teachers a four-year pact with raises of 4.3 percent (retroactive to last year) and 4.7 percent for each of the next three years.

That's a 19.7 percent raise over the length of the contract.

And that's irresponsible.

On the same day more than 50,000 jobs cuts were announced nationally, with the country and state in the grip of a recession, the Roxbury school board handed out increases that most taxpayers who work in the private sector certainly won't see this year or next -- if they can even keep their jobs.

If this is where New Jersey teacher contracts are headed this year, jittery and cash-strapped taxpayers had better send a message to their school boards now: Hold the line.

School boards, of course, want to do what's best for the kids. And most board members don't have the stomach to head down the bumpy road of a protracted contract battle, with added legal fees, fact-finding and a possible strike. So they settle.

But school boards also have to serve the taxpayers, who right now are seeing their earning power and property values going down. Some school board, somewhere, has to draw the line. Who will step up? Not Roxbury.

"Roxbury will no longer have one of the lowest starting salaries in Morris County," board member Pat Miller crowed proudly while approving the deal.

Hey, Miller, you've been duped.

You see, that's the New Jersey Education Association's game. The union scares the lower-paying districts into believing they won't attract good teachers unless they agree to oversize raises. Then, the NJEA moves on to the next lower-paying district with the same argument. It becomes a game of leap-frog as every district tries to be above average.

Gov. Jon Corzine has already warned that aid to schools may have to be cut to balance the state budget. Roxbury gets only one-fifth of its budget covered by the state, and can't expect any more help there. So where will the money come from for the teachers' raises if not higher local taxes? Or will some student programs have to be sacrificed?

This is not about whether teachers are overpaid or underpaid. That's endlessly debatable, but it all comes down to the public's ability to pay. And right now that's being squeezed.

One more thing: With all the layoffs in other industries, more workers are looking to enter the teaching ranks. Many would have jumped at $39,500 (with benefits and summers off) -- the former starting salary in Roxbury.

But the starting salary -- the smallest salary earned by the smallest number of teachers -- is a smoke screen used to make any contract more palatable. The median salary for Roxbury teachers in 2007-08 was $57,895. That number is more relevant. And by the end of the contact, it will be $69,305.

How many taxpayers expect to be making almost $12,000 more in three years?

We applaud Maureen Castriotta, the only dissenter in the 8-1 vote. She realized those raises in this economy are just plain silly.

"Did we spend wisely? No," she said. "Did we improve student achievement? No. We're in an economic crisis, but you'd never know it from this contract. People have to wake up."

Posted by thr3putt on 02/01/09 at 9:06AM

First of all, the correct way to calculate the salary increases would be to multiply the original salary by .043, then add that amount to the original salary. Then multiply that new total amount by .047 and add that, and do that two more times. The numbers are correct.

Next, the point of the editorial, if I understand the message, isn't whether teachers are underpaid, it's the ability of the public to pay at this moment. When the taxpayers, who foot the bill, are losing jobs and homes, don't the teachers have an obligation to take less? (Of course not, it's a powerful union, right? They don't care what is happening around them. They want as much as they can get.) When times are good, teachers get raises that are better than average in private industry (and don't use Wall Street as an example to prove me wrong, please; go back and look at some of the 8 and 9 percent raies awarded to teachers); and when times are bad, teachers, as we see, do far better than average.

And then there's the T-word. Yup, I said it. Who else has tenure? What is that worth? What is it value of never having to take a pay cut? Each year, a teacher's salary grows. Who among us can say they have never had to take a step back in their careers when it comes to earnings? What is that job security worth? Like health benefits, there's a monetary value to tenure, and it's considerable. What is it? Tack that onto the salary and benefits to get a real dollar amount. But teachers don't want to talk about that.

One poster commented about the "pressure" and "scrutiny" of being a teacher. But that's just it. With tenure, there is no real pressure or scrutiny. If you're not in danger of losing your job for poor performance, what real scrutiny are you talking about? The rest of us, in the real world, can be fired at any time, for almost any reason, especially job performance. That can't happen to a teacher, basically short of a sexual felony.

That same poster challenged the writer to come up with a one-day lesson and teach it, on which the editorial writer would be graded. Silly, isn't it? Since that's not his/her profession. It's a good thing the editorial writer didn't target brain surgeons.

While studies show that most workers' days/weeks are growing in the numbers of hours worked, teachers time in the classroom is dwindling. And, with several friends who are teachers, I can tell you, it's less than 6.5 hours per day, as the poster commented. And many teachers use sick days as paid holidays.

Yes, I wrote this. Yes, it's in sentences, so I thank all my English teachers. But to say that they deserve exorbitant raises in a recession because of it is silly. And what about the people who were in the same classes who can't write a sentence or spell or use correct grammar now? Should we dock teachers for them? My belief is there are far more of those than there are of me. So that argument fails, too.

If teachers don't like their jobs, here's a solution -- get a new one. Just quit whining about the pay. If they think it will be more rewarding, they should go be a plumber. They selected this profession. The reason there are so many teachers is not because there are tens of thousands of generous souls who are willing to sacrifice for the good of mankind. That's naive. It's because teaching is not a bad way to make a living.

SPEAKING ON YOUR BEHALF: The Roxbury Teacher Contract

"The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he resigns momentarily from the herd and thinks for himself".

....Archibald Macleish 1892-1982 American Poet


The Roxbury Board of Education approved a 4 year teacher contract by an 8-1 vote during this past Monday's Board of Education meeting. I was the only school board member to cast a vote against this egregious settlement. The Daily Record characterized me as "the lone dissenter" but judging from the great number of public comments posted on the Daily Record and Star-Ledger's websites about this settlement, I am far from alone.

Click on the links to read full articles with comments.

http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20090128/COMMUNITIES44/901280394&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/01/roxbury_teachers_get_close_to.html


New 4-year deal raises Roxbury teacher pay a total of about 20%
District to see savings on benefits in contract


By Matt Manochio • Daily Record • January 28, 2009
Read Comments

ROXBURY-- Teachers in Roxbury will see their salaries rise by close to 20 percent over the next few years under a contract approved this week by the school board.

The four-year contract calls for a retroactive 4.3 percent raise for the last school year, 4.7 percent for the current school year and 4.7 percent in each of the next two school years.
School board members approved the contract Monday with an 8-1 vote.

Board member Maureen Castriotta was the lone dissenter, saying she felt the deal wouldn't improve student achievement, and that it wasn't fiscally responsible to the taxpayers given the downturn to the economy.

Board Vice President John Moschella on Tuesday said the 4.7 percent figure isn't per teacher, rather it's an overall figure percentage of dollars. Actual percent raises vary depending on where a teacher falls on the 17-step salary guide.

"We gave a 4.7 overall, but we took money from the top steps of the guide and earmarked it from the bottom," he said.
He said the district was able to settle upon the percentages because the Roxbury Education Association agreed to enroll in a cheaper "Direct Access Plan" benefits program operated by the state.

Moschella said the district stands to save $300,000 over a 12-month period during the first two school years in the contract.
He said the health coverage in the new plan resembles what teachers had in their former one. As it stands teachers don't pay into their health benefits, but have co-pays for doctor visits.
The previous contract with the Roxbury Education Association expired in June 2007. This new contract covers four school years, beginning retroactively in July 1, 2007, and concluding on June 30, 2011.

The association represents about 450 school employees, including teachers, secretaries and paraprofessionals.
The new base salary for teachers is $40,417, which is a $917 boost from the former base of $39,500.
The salary guide for all employees gets a retroactive 4.3 percent increase for the 2007-08 school year. Raises of 4.7 percent began on July 1, 2008, and will increase by the same percentage on July 1 of both 2009 and 2010.

"Roxbury will no longer have one of the lowest starting salaries in Morris County," board member Pat Miller told the audience of more than 100 people, most of them teachers, at Monday night's meeting.

The board also unanimously approved a three-year contract for cafeteria workers, which runs from July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2011. New hire hourly rates are $10.65 for general workers, $17.25 for elementary school cooks/managers, $18.25 for middle school cook/managers, and $19.25 for high school cook/managers.

Cafeteria salaries see a 4.25 percent increase this school year, a 4 percent increase next year, and a 3.75 percent increase during the final school year of the contract.

and the following by Fred Snowflack from the Daily Record opinion page:

Teacher wage increases recession-proof
January 28, 2009
Read Comments

On Monday, Pfizer said it would buy Wyeth for $68 billion, a transaction that could result in cutting 20,000 jobs worldwide. That same day, such well-known firms as Caterpillar and Home Depot also announced plans to layoff thousands.

On Monday night, the Roxbury school board approved a contract that would give teachers 4.7 percent raises annually in each of the next three years. The teachers also will get a retroactive 4.3 percent increase for the 2007-08 school year. No matter what happens in the real world, nothing changes in the insular world of teacher contracts in New Jersey.

The contract was approved with one dissenting vote.
That came from Maureen Castriotta, a member of the negotiations committee.
She said the board had blown a great chance to truly serve the community by trying to bring about smaller increases in these troubled times. She said many of her constituents were upset with the contract.

In response, board member Greg Somjen said there always will be critics and that the board is in the business of education. Then, Somjen suggested that those who disagree with the board's approach can try to find another place to live.

That was a pretty snotty line, but it did raise a point Somjen may not have known he was raising. And that is, unless you move to perhaps Kansas, you're not going to avoid these salary increases.

You see, there is nothing unique in New Jersey about teachers getting raises of more than 4 percent a year. That is the problem. And it's one that can't be solved by moving somewhere else in New Jersey.

What is needed is an overhaul of how teacher negotiations are conducted.
As of now, teachers are bound to get the county's average salary increase. That average in Morris County is about 4.5 percent a year.
Say, a school district offers an increase of 2 percent a year. The teachers' union would say "no way," and if there is no movement, one moves to "fact-finding." In the end, the increase is going to be at, or around, the county average.

Change can only come about if a district is courageous enough to challenge the system. Let a district refuse to budge from its 2 percent offer and let the negotiating process in all its steps be carried out. And when the district inevitably loses, let it go to court and challenge the system.

That's the only way to bring about a negotiating session that considers such external factors as the general economy and the state's high property taxes.
Some school district officials understand this, but they lack the will, or the vision, or is it guts, to take a stand. That's a shame.

The alternative is the status quo.

Some may wonder if the state Legislature could change the system. Of course it can.
But that's unlikely. The clout of the New Jersey Education Association is substantial. Its pattern is to support virtually every incumbent legislator regardless of party. It's funny, unions are thought to be liberal, but the NJEA is anything but that. It loves the status quo.

And so would you if you were getting raises approaching 5 percent a year in what has been called the worst economic times since the Depression.
Fred Snowflack is editorial page editor of the Daily Record.

CONGRATULATIONS TO OUR 44TH PRESIDENT, BARACK OBAMA!

And to my dear fellow Americans, stand proud! You have once more demonstrated, as you have time and time again throughout our noble and glorious nation's history, an unshakable collective faith in our country's truths and ideals.

'...why abandon a belief

Merely because it ceases to be true.

Cling to it long enough, and not a doubt

It will turn true again...

Most of the change we think we see in life

Is due to truths being in and out of favour.'

...Robert Frost, "The Black Cottage"

THE BLACK COTTAGE
by Robert Frost

She had her own idea of things, the old lady.
And she liked talk. She had seen Garrison
And Whittier, and had her story of them.
One wasn't long in learning that she thought
Whatever else the Civil War was for
It wasn't just to keep the States together,
Nor just to free the slaves, though it did both.
She wouldn't have believed those ends enough
To have given outright for them all she gave.
Her giving somehow touched the principle
That all men are created free and equal.
And to hear her quaint phrases--so removed
From the world's view to-day of all those things.
That's a hard mystery of Jefferson's.
What did he mean? Of course the easy way
Is to decide it simply isn't true.
It may not be. I heard a fellow say so.
But never mind, the Welshman got it planted
Where it will trouble us a thousand years.
Each age will have to reconsider it.
You couldn't tell her what the West was saying,
And what the South to her serene belief.
She had some art of hearing and yet not
Hearing the latter wisdom of the world.
White was the only race she ever knew.
Black she had scarcely seen, and yellow never.
But how could they be made so very unlike
By the same hand working in the same stuff?
She had supposed the war decided that.
What are you going to do with such a person?
Strange how such innocence gets its own way.
I shouldn't be surprised if in this world
It were the force that would at last prevail.
Do you know but for her there was a time
When to please younger members of the church,
Or rather say non-members in the church,
Whom we all have to think of nowadays,
I would have changed the Creed a very little?
Not that she ever had to ask me not to;
It never got so far as that; but the bare thought
Of her old tremulous bonnet in the pew,
And of her half asleep was too much for me.
Why, I might wake her up and startle her.
It was the words 'descended into Hades'
That seemed too pagan to our liberal youth.
You know they suffered from a general onslaught.
And well, if they weren't true why keep right on
Saying them like the heathen? We could drop them.
Only--there was the bonnet in the pew.
Such a phrase couldn't have meant much to her.
But suppose she had missed it from the Creed
As a child misses the unsaid Good-night,
And falls asleep with heartache--how should I feel?
I'm just as glad she made me keep hands off,
For, dear me, why abandon a belief
Merely because it ceases to be true.
Cling to it long enough, and not a doubt
It will turn true again, for so it goes.
Most of the change we think we see in life
Is due to truths being in and out of favour.
As I sit here, and oftentimes, I wish
I could be monarch of a desert land
I could devote and dedicate forever
To the truths we keep coming back and back to.