And I stand by my original assessment of Samuel's "petition".
1. There is an old saying, "A word to the wise is sufficient". Why does Samuel belabor the point about the importance of Carmels in the life of the Church, the economy of grace, and the salvation of souls. Doesn't he think that the Bishop (who has forgotten more than laymen like Samuel or myself have ever learned about the Catholic Faith) already knows this? If "a word to the wise" isn't enough -- and it clearly isn't for Samuel, because he belabors the point -- he must consider the Bishop either ignorant or non-wise.
2. Samuel also admits that he already asked a couple of times, and basically got a "no". You can't force Bishop Williamson to do your will, no matter how biased you are
, how many daughters you have in a given convent, etc. Just give up already! It's not respectful to try to bring a petition into it, or to try to guilt-trip the bishop into doing your will. That is not right, and it is not respectful. But if you do insist on proceeding with such a fool's errand,
then A) don't be surprised when others defend the Bishop and/or rebuke your impudence, and B) don't hold your breath for any favorable results.
3. At least you admit you're biased because your daughter is involved. You are letting your emotions get in the way of clear Catholic thought on this matter. At least I can see this situation objectively because I don't have a daughter involved.
4. Saying "We ask you" doesn't make a demand into a request. The context of the alleged "request" must be taken into account: the whole letter, its contents, its tone, the existence of past requests, its audience (is it a public petition, or a private letter?) and other important points.
I could say, "We ask you to do the right thing and show yourself a non-hypocrite by donating large sums of money to the charity of my choice." Or what if I was extremely condescending in the whole letter, trying to teach a bishop the basics of the economy of grace and the soul of the apostolate? (The necessity of contemplative orders for gaining grace from God, which is used by priests in the active apostolate to convert souls)
5. Again, I ask the public: are petitions like this even a Catholic thing? I'm referring specifically to the case of submitting a petition to the Pope, Bishop, or priest with a bunch of signatures which are intended to give the petition more weight -- as if the will of the people is somehow sacred. Isn't there a heresy in there somewhere? Anti-clericalism? Anti-hierarchy? Americanism? False democratic ideas from the so-called Enlightenment? "The will of God" and/or authority coming from the people rather than from God?
By citing 5+ examples and quotes from +ABL, and actively saying that +ABL would have certainly donated to this cause, it is implied that +Williamson is either a hypocrite and/or "no follower of +ABL". I repeat: If a man can't refuse a "request" without looking like a complete ______, then it's not a respectful request! It's a thinly veiled demand, or something else. But it's not a polite request.
Another excerpt from Samuel's "petition":
Your Excellency, we do not ask for miracles, but only that you follow the Archbishop's example, to help those who need your help, to gather with Him, as Our Lord asked you to.
So, how would +Williamson theoretically refuse this "request"?"No, I choose to NOT follow the saintly Archbishop's example. And I will also pass on the "gathering with Our Lord". He asked me to? Too bad, I guess."
How would that make Bishop Williamson look?
Sorry, but this is NOT a respectful letter.