Presumably the government didn’t want to wade into the obscure question of what Harry’s actual surname is. William, as many know, used the surname “Mountbatten-Windsor” when suing Closer magazine in the French courts, but the order-in-council providing that “Mountbatten-Windsor” is the surname of certain royals doesn’t seem to apply to him (or to Harry). At Sandhurst and in the military he used the surname “Wales”, but now his father is no longer the Prince of Wales. So it was probably wise for DOJ to sidestep the issue entirely.
Sort of. He could call himself “Harry Sussex”, just as his uncle was credited as “Edward Wessex” in his documentary series, “Crown and Country” (or like the photographer William Cavendish, Earl of Burlington, who’s known professionally as “Bill Burlington”). But in that case it would be wrong to refer to him as “Mr Sussex”. (If you’ve read L.P. Hartley’s The Go-Between – highly recommended if you haven’t – you may recall that Viscount Trimingham corrects the narrator after being addressed as “Mr. Trimingham”.)
You might think it would be that simple, but it isn’t: Form DS-160 (the non-immigrant visa application) asks for all surnames listed *in your passport*, and Prince Harry’s likely doesn’t list any. (His passport isn’t public, but you can see copies of his parents’ passports from the 1980s in the book In Private-In Public: The Prince and Princess of Wales, by Alastair Burnet and Tim Graham. His father’s passport simply gives his name as, “His Royal Highness Charles Philip Arthur George The Prince of Wales”.)
You can also find online the birth certificate for his daughter issued by Santa Barbara County, which, oddly, lists his first name as “The Duke of Sussex” and his last name as “His Royal Highness”. Maybe DOJ should have used that, but somehow I doubt that would convey the air of proud republicanism that you seem to want from their legal briefs.
Incidentally, the first paragraph of the government’s brief opposing the Heritage Foundation’s motion for a preliminary injunction indicates that they’re using “Prince Harry” as an alternate name for “Henry Charles Albert David”, so my guess is that the latter name is how he’s identified in his immigration files.
I was also going to ask about this, because my understanding is that Windsor is the surname of male-line descendants of George V, which Harry is not. As a male-line descendant of Elizabeth II, I thought his surname would be Mountbatten-Windsor.
I was hopeful before I clicked on that link, but then my cynicism was quickly proven out. If we should honor acts of mercy regardless of the general character and purpose of a group, then I'm sure the "Church of Satan Soup Kitchen", or "KKK Chemo Rides" would be getting nice sympathetic write-ups in the NCR as well.
I am very perplexed on what Bishop Olson has done; it seems to be done quicker than I have ever seen a diocese or Vatican do anything.. Grew up in the Houston-Galveston diocese and then moved to the Diocese of Tyler and now live in Archdiocese of Denver. Bishops are still human beings;some are great administrators others are not. I am really curious about what the parishes in his diocese think about the situation.
Regarding the "rightsizing" question, how much could you expand if you raised the subscription price by a nominal amount, say 50 cents or $1 a month? Seems to me ta gentle way to spread the cost of growth and do more of what you are doing very well in a way no one else is doing it.
Incidentally, when I re-subscribed a month or so ago I had a dollar amount in mind that our family could afford, but I only had the option to select the minimum or a few other set rates. My price was going to be somewhere in the middle.
Another thought for consideration re:”rightsizing”...
Could there be an option for single payment “boosts”? For such times as already paid subscribers are moved to financially express a burst of gratitude for The Pillar’s work without necessarily increasing their overall subscription level? Possibly extended to non-subscription readers as well?
This obviously lacks the stability factor inherent to subscriptions of course... but perhaps still a helpful option for some readers?
As someone who’s involved in expanding businesses I’ll say that ambition often outpaces the pragmatic, and frequently proves harmful to both the business and individuals involved. I can’t speak to whether your bills are getting paid, but grow at a pace that works best for you and your families. They’re the primary vocation.
Especially considering your reason for being--accountability and transparency. It appears both of those have become more elusive rather than more apparent, if bp Olsen is any indication. And don’t forget we’re waiting for Stika to “resign,” which clearly isn’t going to happen. So there’s a second example.
Right now obviously, the minimum subscription is $5/month but it would be interesting to know what more impact or more work you can provide at various levels from subscribers for levels of $10/month, $20/month, etc. One way to encourage a higher subscription price could be setting aside a portion of it like a tithe for a Catholic charity or the subjects of reporting who need it (like Catholics in Nigeria, Ukraine, etc)
I am someone who finds herself pretty poor right now, so I would appreciate it if you wouldn't raise subscription prices. There are probably a lot of readers who could afford to subscribe but don't. If you know any of them personally, you might ask them why they don't and see if you can figure out a way to change some minds on the sunject. As far as I'm concerned, Starting Seven is the most important thing you do, with in-depth reporting in second place. But you need to work fewer hours and spend more time with your families or you will burn out.
One thing I note is that many of the articles have links to the story and yes, the non English language is noted. There are sometimes stories that I would like to read but Unfortunately I don’t have any idea how to translate the articles into English. Not sure what to do about that... Thx for everything you and the team do!
You can get a browser extension for Google Translate that auto-translates web pages as needed. It’s pretty accurate, if a little bit too literal and has the odd mistake like translating ‘Giovanni Paolo II’ as ‘Praol II Young’.
The subscription cost/fee is one important question of course. But I get the sense the bigger issue is where to draw the content line - for instance, the Knoxville situation was one that not many readers would know about, but once the story is introduced, what is The Pillar’s role/obligation to see it through. I imagine this consumes a lot of your resources. Maybe finding a way to tier-down subsequent stories (another is the Vatican trial) with less in depth work assigned to it. Keep digging, you will find the right answer.
Tim, you make a good point. But I am in Knoxville and we have been suffering for years. If The Pillar had not started the reporting, I fear we would be utterly ignored as we’re a small diocese with an influential cardinal. Oh wait. We are ignored.
I have to say, there is greater damage done here than meets the eye. The complete lack of interest by those who have the power to do something takes one aback. They can’t even acknowledge receipt of a letter from a group of priests. I have concluded the prime consideration is standing by bishops even if their behavior drives away the (formerly) faithful. You can’t hang by your fingernails forever. Even if/when the bishop is replaced, the extreme disappointment everyone feels in the way this has been handled will take a very long time to heal, assuming it ever does.
Excellent article and analysis of events worldwide 🌐 exactly why Christ's commission to Simon Peter 2000 years ago to feed my sheep and tend my lambs will always be a universal [Catholic] endeavor. I'm surprised that there's not subsidies from Rome itself your publication should be eligible for financial support considering your worldwide coverage of church events 🤔 I appreciate the unbiased reporting the Pillar always provides and wish I had more I could contribute financially but unfortunately I'm on limited disability social security payment each month for my heart and lung problems but am very proud to give my $5 monthly to read the best source of church news I know of, including Luke Coppen's Starting Seven. Keep up the good work and my God's Providence and the Holy Spirit guide the Pillar going forward 🙏
Awesome Johnny Cash song 🎵 too, one of the best I've heard from him 😀 Otherwise onward and upwards with your endeavors. GOD'S GRACE ALWAYS 🙏 ✨️
Yes I must agree it is far more important for the Heritage Foundation to file a lawsuit to get at Prince Harry’s file than it is for CONGRESS to do its job and PASS IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION. The Heritage Foundation’s money would be better spent turning out of office those members who refuse to do what they are paid to do.
What’s the subscription level need to be for Ed to design a watch with liturgy of the hours complication that doesn’t cost a kidney for a garbage movement?
Re rightsizing, I appreciate the in-depth explainers but rarely click on them. Perhaps the same breadth of coverage with less in depth would be more sustainable, especially since subscriptions aren't where you want them. It's not as though you don't ask, so I don't know what will move the needle on getting people to subscribe. But I don't think 12-hour workdays are sustainable long-term for you and your families. Even with all the work you put in, I still get an unfortunate sense that things are sometimes rushed. Some posts show typos and errors that a good copy editor would have caught, or even a decent spellcheck.
Your personal digressions on subjects like baseball or movies are enjoyable but not mission critical, so sticking to the news might free up some time as well. My prayers are with you and your important work!
Just to express a contrary opinion, Knoxville and Vatican finance are the two topics that I read every word of. But I could get by with less, and your families comes first. Also, on the podcast, I like a little back and forth on less newsworthy topics like watches and cowboy hats.
Presumably the government didn’t want to wade into the obscure question of what Harry’s actual surname is. William, as many know, used the surname “Mountbatten-Windsor” when suing Closer magazine in the French courts, but the order-in-council providing that “Mountbatten-Windsor” is the surname of certain royals doesn’t seem to apply to him (or to Harry). At Sandhurst and in the military he used the surname “Wales”, but now his father is no longer the Prince of Wales. So it was probably wise for DOJ to sidestep the issue entirely.
ha! This is delightfully pedantic!
Couldn't he use Sussex as a last name in the American context?
Sort of. He could call himself “Harry Sussex”, just as his uncle was credited as “Edward Wessex” in his documentary series, “Crown and Country” (or like the photographer William Cavendish, Earl of Burlington, who’s known professionally as “Bill Burlington”). But in that case it would be wrong to refer to him as “Mr Sussex”. (If you’ve read L.P. Hartley’s The Go-Between – highly recommended if you haven’t – you may recall that Viscount Trimingham corrects the narrator after being addressed as “Mr. Trimingham”.)
Whatever he calls himself, he will have done so on the relevant visa application which requires listing a surname.
He didn’t fill it in first name “prince” last name “Harry.”
Exactly. And if he then claims that legal process in that name is improper, he will have committed the offense of applying falsely.
There is a reason that not even Justin Trudeau's Canada wanted this guy.
You might think it would be that simple, but it isn’t: Form DS-160 (the non-immigrant visa application) asks for all surnames listed *in your passport*, and Prince Harry’s likely doesn’t list any. (His passport isn’t public, but you can see copies of his parents’ passports from the 1980s in the book In Private-In Public: The Prince and Princess of Wales, by Alastair Burnet and Tim Graham. His father’s passport simply gives his name as, “His Royal Highness Charles Philip Arthur George The Prince of Wales”.)
You can also find online the birth certificate for his daughter issued by Santa Barbara County, which, oddly, lists his first name as “The Duke of Sussex” and his last name as “His Royal Highness”. Maybe DOJ should have used that, but somehow I doubt that would convey the air of proud republicanism that you seem to want from their legal briefs.
Incidentally, the first paragraph of the government’s brief opposing the Heritage Foundation’s motion for a preliminary injunction indicates that they’re using “Prince Harry” as an alternate name for “Henry Charles Albert David”, so my guess is that the latter name is how he’s identified in his immigration files.
I was also going to ask about this, because my understanding is that Windsor is the surname of male-line descendants of George V, which Harry is not. As a male-line descendant of Elizabeth II, I thought his surname would be Mountbatten-Windsor.
It is interesting to read how some Sisters are responding to the Dodgers' inclusion of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.
https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/ncr-voices/actual-sisters-react-la-dodgers-and-sisters-perpetual-indulgence
I was hopeful before I clicked on that link, but then my cynicism was quickly proven out. If we should honor acts of mercy regardless of the general character and purpose of a group, then I'm sure the "Church of Satan Soup Kitchen", or "KKK Chemo Rides" would be getting nice sympathetic write-ups in the NCR as well.
I am very perplexed on what Bishop Olson has done; it seems to be done quicker than I have ever seen a diocese or Vatican do anything.. Grew up in the Houston-Galveston diocese and then moved to the Diocese of Tyler and now live in Archdiocese of Denver. Bishops are still human beings;some are great administrators others are not. I am really curious about what the parishes in his diocese think about the situation.
Regarding the "rightsizing" question, how much could you expand if you raised the subscription price by a nominal amount, say 50 cents or $1 a month? Seems to me ta gentle way to spread the cost of growth and do more of what you are doing very well in a way no one else is doing it.
I also agree with this. We want The Pillar to be successful too, and burning yourselves out won't do any good for anyone, especially yourselves.
Incidentally, when I re-subscribed a month or so ago I had a dollar amount in mind that our family could afford, but I only had the option to select the minimum or a few other set rates. My price was going to be somewhere in the middle.
I would also be willing to up my amount for my subscription.
Another thought for consideration re:”rightsizing”...
Could there be an option for single payment “boosts”? For such times as already paid subscribers are moved to financially express a burst of gratitude for The Pillar’s work without necessarily increasing their overall subscription level? Possibly extended to non-subscription readers as well?
This obviously lacks the stability factor inherent to subscriptions of course... but perhaps still a helpful option for some readers?
As someone who’s involved in expanding businesses I’ll say that ambition often outpaces the pragmatic, and frequently proves harmful to both the business and individuals involved. I can’t speak to whether your bills are getting paid, but grow at a pace that works best for you and your families. They’re the primary vocation.
Especially considering your reason for being--accountability and transparency. It appears both of those have become more elusive rather than more apparent, if bp Olsen is any indication. And don’t forget we’re waiting for Stika to “resign,” which clearly isn’t going to happen. So there’s a second example.
Gentlepeople of The Pillar, thank you for your humility, honesty, balance and service to many of us in the Church.
Right now obviously, the minimum subscription is $5/month but it would be interesting to know what more impact or more work you can provide at various levels from subscribers for levels of $10/month, $20/month, etc. One way to encourage a higher subscription price could be setting aside a portion of it like a tithe for a Catholic charity or the subjects of reporting who need it (like Catholics in Nigeria, Ukraine, etc)
I am someone who finds herself pretty poor right now, so I would appreciate it if you wouldn't raise subscription prices. There are probably a lot of readers who could afford to subscribe but don't. If you know any of them personally, you might ask them why they don't and see if you can figure out a way to change some minds on the sunject. As far as I'm concerned, Starting Seven is the most important thing you do, with in-depth reporting in second place. But you need to work fewer hours and spend more time with your families or you will burn out.
Rightsize! Don’t burn out! Don’t become an institution!
Thinking about the Starting Seven.
One thing I note is that many of the articles have links to the story and yes, the non English language is noted. There are sometimes stories that I would like to read but Unfortunately I don’t have any idea how to translate the articles into English. Not sure what to do about that... Thx for everything you and the team do!
You can get a browser extension for Google Translate that auto-translates web pages as needed. It’s pretty accurate, if a little bit too literal and has the odd mistake like translating ‘Giovanni Paolo II’ as ‘Praol II Young’.
The subscription cost/fee is one important question of course. But I get the sense the bigger issue is where to draw the content line - for instance, the Knoxville situation was one that not many readers would know about, but once the story is introduced, what is The Pillar’s role/obligation to see it through. I imagine this consumes a lot of your resources. Maybe finding a way to tier-down subsequent stories (another is the Vatican trial) with less in depth work assigned to it. Keep digging, you will find the right answer.
Tim, you make a good point. But I am in Knoxville and we have been suffering for years. If The Pillar had not started the reporting, I fear we would be utterly ignored as we’re a small diocese with an influential cardinal. Oh wait. We are ignored.
I have to say, there is greater damage done here than meets the eye. The complete lack of interest by those who have the power to do something takes one aback. They can’t even acknowledge receipt of a letter from a group of priests. I have concluded the prime consideration is standing by bishops even if their behavior drives away the (formerly) faithful. You can’t hang by your fingernails forever. Even if/when the bishop is replaced, the extreme disappointment everyone feels in the way this has been handled will take a very long time to heal, assuming it ever does.
Excellent article and analysis of events worldwide 🌐 exactly why Christ's commission to Simon Peter 2000 years ago to feed my sheep and tend my lambs will always be a universal [Catholic] endeavor. I'm surprised that there's not subsidies from Rome itself your publication should be eligible for financial support considering your worldwide coverage of church events 🤔 I appreciate the unbiased reporting the Pillar always provides and wish I had more I could contribute financially but unfortunately I'm on limited disability social security payment each month for my heart and lung problems but am very proud to give my $5 monthly to read the best source of church news I know of, including Luke Coppen's Starting Seven. Keep up the good work and my God's Providence and the Holy Spirit guide the Pillar going forward 🙏
Awesome Johnny Cash song 🎵 too, one of the best I've heard from him 😀 Otherwise onward and upwards with your endeavors. GOD'S GRACE ALWAYS 🙏 ✨️
AMEN 🙏
Yes I must agree it is far more important for the Heritage Foundation to file a lawsuit to get at Prince Harry’s file than it is for CONGRESS to do its job and PASS IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION. The Heritage Foundation’s money would be better spent turning out of office those members who refuse to do what they are paid to do.
What’s the subscription level need to be for Ed to design a watch with liturgy of the hours complication that doesn’t cost a kidney for a garbage movement?
Re rightsizing, I appreciate the in-depth explainers but rarely click on them. Perhaps the same breadth of coverage with less in depth would be more sustainable, especially since subscriptions aren't where you want them. It's not as though you don't ask, so I don't know what will move the needle on getting people to subscribe. But I don't think 12-hour workdays are sustainable long-term for you and your families. Even with all the work you put in, I still get an unfortunate sense that things are sometimes rushed. Some posts show typos and errors that a good copy editor would have caught, or even a decent spellcheck.
Your personal digressions on subjects like baseball or movies are enjoyable but not mission critical, so sticking to the news might free up some time as well. My prayers are with you and your important work!
Stay small.
Just to express a contrary opinion, Knoxville and Vatican finance are the two topics that I read every word of. But I could get by with less, and your families comes first. Also, on the podcast, I like a little back and forth on less newsworthy topics like watches and cowboy hats.