The Order of Service for Baroness Thatcher's Funeral

A general view of the altar inside St Paul's Cathedral, where Baroness Thatcher's funeral will take place. Photo: Anthony Devlin/PA Wire

Downing Street has released a detailed Order of Service for Baroness Thatcher's funeral on Wednesday.

• 10am - Heads of State, the Royal Representatives of Heads of State and the Diplomatic Corps are received by a member of Chapter at the South Door of St. Paul's Cathedral and taken to their seats.

• 10:10am - Visiting Representatives of World Faiths leave the Dean’s Aisle and make their way to their seats in the Quire.

• 10:15am - Lord Speaker, Mr Speaker and the Prime Minister are received at the North Door of the Cathedral by a member of Chapter and then move to their seats under the Dome.

• 10:25am - The Chapter, the Bishop of London and the Archbishop of Canterbury leave the Dean’s Aisle and proceed to the Great West Door of the Cathedral.

Margaret Thatcher laid down plans on how the service should proceed. Credit: Frank Gunn/The Canadian Press/Press Association Images

• 10:35am - The Lord Mayor and Sheriffs arrive and are received by the Chapter, the Bishop of London and the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Sheriffs then sit in the Quire.

• 10:40am - Members of the family arrive at the Cathedral and are received by the Chapter, the Bishop of London and the Archbishop of Canterbury and taken to their seats under the Dome.

• 10:45am - The Foundation Procession leaves the Dean’s Aisle.

• 10:45am - The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh arrive at the Cathedral and are received at the foot of the West Steps by the Lord Mayor, who accompanies them to the Great West Door, where they are received by the Chapter, the Bishop of London and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Her Majesty is preceded by the Lord Mayor bearing the Mourning Sword.

• The Queen and Prince Philip then make their way to their seats under the Dome.

• 11am - The clock of St Paul's Cathedral strikes the hour. The coffin is carried into the Cathedral and placed upon the Bier under the Dome.

Amanda and Michael Thatcher pictured with their grandmother in October 2003. Credit: Stefan Rousseau/PA Archive/Press Association Images

• Michael Thatcher and Amanda Thatcher - Lady Thatcher's grandchildren - carry cushions bearing the Insignia of the Order of the Garter and the Order of Merit, which are laid on the Dome Altar.

As the Procession of the Coffin moves through the Nave, the Choir will sing before the Dean of St Paul's, the Very Rev David Ison, addresses the congregation with the Bidding.

A selection of hymns of readings will then be given - chosen by Lady Thatcher. 

Baroness Thatcher's granddaughter Amanda and Prime Minister David Cameron will give readings at the service.

Paul Johnson on Heroes: What Great Statesmen Have to Teach Us

PAUL JOHNSON is the author of several bestselling books, including the classic Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties, A History of the American People, A History of Christianity, Intellectuals: From Marx and Tolstoy to Sartre and Chomsky, A History of the Jews, Creators: From Chaucer and Durer to Picasso and Disney, Art: A New History, George Washington: The Founding Father, and most recently, Heroes: From Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar to Churchill and de Gaulle. His articles have appeared in numerous publications, including National Review, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Spectator, the Daily Telegram, and the Daily Mail. In 2006, he received the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

The following is adapted from a lecture delivered on November 1, 2007, on board the Crystal Symphony, during a Hillsdale College cruise from Montreal to Miami.

---

IF WE LOOK at what heroic statesmen can teach us, the sartorial dimension—what they wear—is indicative. Prince Otto von Bismarck, the Prussian who created Germany in its modern form, always put on uniforms when he addressed the Reichstag on an important constitutional issue. His successor as Chancellor, Betthman-Hollweg, had himself specially promoted from major to colonel so that, when declaring war in 1914, he could speak to the Reichstag from a suitable rank.

The English and American traditions and instincts are quite different. George Washington might wear a uniform when the Republic was in danger, to indicate his willingness and ability to defend it. As a rule, however, he deliberately stressed his civilian status by his dress. He was anxious to show that, unlike Cromwell 150 years before, he would not use his military victories to become a Caesar. His self-restraint fascinated contemporaries. After American independence was secured, King George III asked an American, “What will George Washington do now?” He was told: “I expect he will go back to his farm.” The King commented, in frank admiration: “If he does that, he will be the greatest man on earth.” And that is what he did. When he finally—and reluctantly—accepted political office, he waited to be summoned by election. The importance of Washington’s behavior should never be underrated, contrasting, as it did, so markedly with the behavior of Napoleon Bonaparte a few years later. It illustrated all the difference between a civil and a military culture. In statesmanship, personal self-restraint in the search for and exercise of power is a key lesson to teach.

The Duke of Wellington, for instance, though known as the Iron Duke and the victor in some 50 battles, would never have dreamed of appearing in Parliament in military attire. On the contrary: he fought the Battle of Waterloo in dark blue civilian dress. Winston Churchill, too, never set foot in the House of Commons as a soldier. He loved uniforms and often wore them on non-Parliamentary occasions, including his semi-nautical rig as an Elder Brother of Trinity House. He had a right, too, to dress up. For he had taken part in active campaigns in Asia and Africa, and in 1899, at the Battle of Omdurman, had taken part in one of the last successful cavalry charges in the history of warfare. At the Potsdam Conference in 1945 he appeared in Royal Air Force uniform, one of his favorites. Marshall Stalin, as he liked to call himself, appeared in the white full dress uniform of a Marshall of the Red Army. But my award for statesmanship goes to the third member of the Big Three, Harry S Truman, who wore a neat blue civilian suit. No one had a better right to military rig. He was, ex officio, commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces. He had seen action in the First World War as an army major, and took an active part in the Reserve throughout the interwar period, probably knowing more about the military state of the world—and periodically issuing well-argued warnings—than any other member of Congress. But he rightly followed Washington’s example and stuck to the constitutional proprieties. How sensible he was became clear later when he had to deal with the popular but difficult General Douglas MacArthur.

It is worth noting that one of the greatest victories of the 20th century, the defeat of the Soviet Union in the Cold War at the end of the 1980s, was achieved by three eminently civilian heroes: Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. The popes always wear white, the symbol of peace. Mr. Reagan, quite capable of acting heroic roles on screen, never succumbed to the temptation of wearing uniform in office. Margaret Thatcher was a war leader as well as a great leader in peace. She showed considerable courage during the Falklands War, a hazardous business for Britain with its limited military resources, but she never once stepped outside her strictly civilian role, even sartorially—though, as I often noted, she could snap her handbag with a military ring.

Statesmen at War

War is the most serious business that statesmen-heroes have to undertake, and a proper understanding of the precise frontier between civilian and military decision-making is one of the most valuable lessons they teach, never more so than today. In Western democracies like the United States and Britain, the civil power, elected by the people, has the sole right to declare war and make peace. In the conduct of operations, it must lay down clear objectives and give the military commanders their orders accordingly. But then, having done that, it must leave the way to secure these objectives, subject to the rules of law, to the professional commanders. It is not for the military to dictate policies, as General MacArthur tried to do, but equally it is not for the politicians to tell the generals how to fight.

This last rule has been broken several times in my lifetime, and always with disastrous results. The first occasion was during the brief Suez War of 1956, which the British Prime Minister, Sir Anthony Eden, with his French allies, launched against Egypt. Eden was a man of peace who hated war, and got involved in this one reluctantly. He made many mistakes. He acted in a secretive manner, not taking into his confidence the House of Commons or even all his Cabinet colleagues, and above all his American ally, President Eisenhower. As a result there was great opposition to the war, at home and abroad, once it was launched. But his most serious mistake was to fail to give his military commanders clear orders about their objectives, and then leave them to get on with it. He tried to fight a kind of limited and political war, with the generals and air marshals restrained by political factors in what weapons they could use. He even told the Royal Air Force not to use bombs above a certain weight. The confusion of the commanders about what they were supposed to be doing was a factor in the war’s failure, which ended with an ignominious Anglo-French withdrawal, dictated by political factors. The Suez War was a historic demonstration of how fatal to success it is to muddle politics and military operations together.

That being so, it is astonishing to think that, only a few years later, the United States made exactly the same mistake in Vietnam. It has always struck me as tragic that the decision whether or not America should get involved in Vietnam was not taken while President Eisenhower was still in the White House. He had seen, from his ample experience in World War Two, how vital it was for politicians to settle the objects of war, and soldiers the means to secure them. Confusion of the two roles, he learned in the Mediterranean and European campaigns of 1942 to 1945, invariably proved costly. My guess is that Eisenhower would have decisively rejected any direct U.S. involvement, and would not have agreed to any plan which meant fighting a land war there. In the unlikely event of his agreeing to fight a war, however, he would have insisted on fighting it properly—that is, going all out for total victory with all the resources America could command—just as he had done with the invasion of occupied Europe in June 1944. That was the simple but logical view of a man who had exercised power from both sides of the political-military divide: avoid war if you possibly can, but if you can’t, fight it to win at all costs.

Unfortunately, Eisenhower was in retirement when the time for decision came. John F. Kennedy agreed to enter the war, and Lyndon B. Johnson agreed to extend it. At no point did either president formulate clear war aims or issue precise orders to their military commanders based on such aims. When I went to see President Johnson in 1967 and had an opportunity to discuss the Vietnam War with him in the White House, I was dismayed to find him imprecise about his war aims. He used such phrases as “contain communist advance” and “defeat communism.” But he did not lay down any object which could be secured by military means, and I wondered what exactly were the orders he issued to his generals or how they understood them. Johnson, like Eden before him, interfered almost daily in the conduct of operations, especially in the bombing war, deciding himself when and where raids should take place and what bombs to use, trying at times to orchestrate his military operations with his peace ventures. The mistakes Eden made at Suez were repeated, on a larger scale and for a longer period, and the predictable and disastrous results were of a correspondingly greater magnitude.

Let us turn now to Iraq, and see how the same considerations apply. In the first Iraq war, we were responding to the unprovoked invasion and occupation of Kuwait by Saddam Hussein’s forces. This was a matter directly involving the United Nations. If Mr. Reagan had still been in the White House, I have no doubt that he and Mrs. Thatcher would have adopted stern war aims, involving not just the liberation of Kuwait by armed force but the replacement of the Saddam Hussein regime with a democratic one under Western and U.N. supervision. Unfortunately Reagan had been succeeded by a much less clear-sighted, albeit well-meaning, president, George Bush Sr. It was not even clear, at first, that America would insist on reversing the invasion and occupation rather than be content with containing Iraqi aggression at the Saudi Arabian frontier. This disastrous response was jettisoned by the most forceful pressure from Margaret Thatcher, who insisted that Iraq be ejected from all Kuwait’s territory. This was done, under a U.N. resolution, with the military assistance of over 50 allies in Operation Desert Storm. But there was no agreement about the future war aim of removing Saddam and his militaristic regime. The generals had no instructions to “go on to Baghdad” and therefore halted operations when Saddam and his forces asked for an armistice. Alas, by that time Margaret Thatcher was no longer in office and had been succeeded by the weak and uncertain John Major. There was, in fact, weakness in both Washington and London, and as a result Saddam Hussein was left in power.

It is important to remember all this when we consider the present situation in Iraq. In the first war, the outrage the world felt at the brutal Iraqi conquest of Kuwait was overwhelming, and to destroy his regime and replace it by a peaceful and democratic one made obvious and popular sense. I have no doubt that when George Bush the younger authorized the second war against Iraq, he had in mind to complete the business left unfinished by the first—the son showing resolution where the father had shown doubt. But the actual reasons given for the second war were quite different, and much less plausible, and so carried less weight with the world. Many people failed to follow or agree with the line of argument which led from 9/11—an unprovoked act of aggression similar to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait—to the subsequent American attack on Iraq. They welcomed the overthrow of Saddam and his regime, and his subsequent trial and execution. But they were not clear why America was occupying Iraq as part of its worldwide fight against terror.

It seems to me that this confusion, originating in the first Iraq war and deepened in the second, lies at the root of our present difficulties. What successful statesmanship in the past teaches us, again and again, is that clarity of aim is paramount, above all in the deadly serious business of war-making. The Allies in the First World War were never clear about why they were fighting it—and Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points, it can be argued, added to the confusion. Therein lay the weakness of the Versailles settlement, which laid the foundations of another conflict. In the Second World War, the Allies agreed on at least one thing: the unconditional surrender of Germany and the total destruction of the Nazi regime. It was not everything but it was something. By contrast, it is worth adding, the Western victory in the Cold War—achieved not by military force but by politics, economics, ideology and psychology—had no provision for what was to happen in Russia. There was no decommunization, as there had been deNazification in Germany after 1945, no trial of communist leaders for crimes against humanity, and none of the efforts, so successful in postwar Germany, to demonstrate the benefits of political and economic freedom and the rule of law. The result was to leave the communist apparatus intact beneath the surface—especially its most resilient and ruthless part, the secret police. And it is the secret police, personified in the presidency of Mr. Putin, who have inherited the state. Russia is no longer capable of challenging the United States and the West militarily, as it did until the late 1980s. But it is still capable and ready to make a great deal of trouble for us all, on a scale which makes Saddam’s Iraq seem insignificant.

Five Keys to Democratic Statesmanship

All these examples are reasons why I say that the ability to see the world clearly, and to draw the right conclusions from what is seen, is the foremost lesson which great men and women of state have to teach us. But there are many more, of which I would single out the five most important.

First, ideas and beliefs. The best kind of democratic leader has just a few—perhaps three or four—central principles to which he is passionately attached and will not sacrifice under any circumstances. This was true, for instance, of Truman, of Konrad Adenauer of Germany, Alcide de Gasperi of Italy, and Robert Schuman of France—all the outstanding men who did most to raise Europe from the ashes of the Second World War and who built up the West as a bulwark against Soviet advance and a repository of a free civilization. It was also true of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, the two outstanding leaders of the next generation who carried on the work. I am not impressed by leaders who have definite views on everything. History teaches it is a mistake to have too many convictions, held with equal certitude and tenacity. They crowd each other out. A great leader is someone who can distinguish between the essential and the peripheral—between what must be done and what is merely desirable. Mrs. Thatcher really had only three musts: uphold the rule of law at home and abroad; keep government activities to the minimum, and so taxes low; encourage individuals to do as much as they can, as well as they can.

There are also, of course, statesmen who are necessarily dominated by one overwhelming object dictated to them by events or destiny. Thus Abraham Lincoln felt all else had to be sacrificed to the overwhelming necessity of holding the Union together, behind the principles of 1776. Likewise, Charles de Gaulle, in 1940, advanced the simple proposition that France was not defeated and incarnated it in his person. The way in which both men concentrated all their thoughts, energies, and skills on one end are lessons in single-mindedness and the power this can bring to action. A statesman must also be able, for a spell, to place one object of policy before all others, and this Winston Churchill did in 1940, when keeping Britain in the war by successfully preventing a Nazi conquest took precedence over all other aims. Such concentration of effort is itself a product of clarity of vision which includes a strong sense of proportion.

Next comes willpower. I think the history of great men and women teaches that willpower is the most decisive of all qualities in public life. A politician can have immense intelligence and all the other virtues, but if will is lacking he is nothing. Usually a leader has it in abundance. Will springs from unshakeable confidence in being right, but also from a more primitive instinct to dominate events which has little to do with logic or reason. Churchill had it. De Gaulle had it. Margaret Thatcher had it, to an unusual degree. It could be seen that, surrounded by her male Cabinet colleagues—whose knowledge and technical qualifications were often superior—she alone possessed will, and one could almost watch them bowing to it. Of course, will is often in history the source of evil. Hitler came from nothing to power, and the absolute control of a great nation, almost entirely through the force of his will. And it remained in him virtually to the end. Stalin’s dictatorship in Russia, and Mao Tse-Tung’s in China, were also largely exercises in personal will. Mao’s overwhelming will, we now know, led to the deaths of 70 million fellow Chinese. The cost of a misdirected will is almost unimaginably high. Those three or four simple central beliefs behind the will must be right and morally sound.

A third virtue is pertinacity. Mere flashes of will are not enough. The will must be organically linked to resolution, a determination to see the cause through at all costs. There are dark days in every venture, however just. Washington knew this in his long, eight-year war. Lincoln knew this in his long and often agonizing struggle with the South. One aspect of pertinacity is patience. Another is a certain primitive doggedness. One learns a lot about these things by studying Martin Gilbert’s magnificent record of Churchill’s leadership. “It’s dogged as does it” is an old English proverb. True enough. But doggedness should not be confused with blind obstinacy—the obstinacy of a George III or a Jefferson Davis. As with will, resolution must be linked to sound aims.

Fourth is the ability to communicate. The value of possessing a few simple ideas which are true and workable is enormously enhanced if the leader can put them across with equal simplicity. Ronald Reagan had this gift to an unusual degree—quite unlike his co-worker, Margaret Thatcher. While Reagan charmed and mesmerised, she had to bludgeon. There was a comparable contrast between Washington, who had no skill in plausible speechmaking, and Lincoln, not only a great orator for a set occasion, but a man whose everyday remarks carried enormous verbal power. But where words fail, example can take their place. Washington communicated by his actions and his personality. He was followed because Americans could see that he was an honest, incorruptible and decent man. Mrs. Thatcher too governed by personality. The Russians called her the Iron Lady. You do not need to charm when you are manifestly made of iron. It is a form of communication in itself.

The fifth and last of the virtues we learn about heroes is magnanimity: greatness of soul. It is not easy to define this supreme quality, which few even among the greatest leaders possess. It is a virtue which makes one warm to its possessor. We not only respect and like, we love Lincoln because he had it to an unusual degree. It was part of his inner being. And Churchill, who also had it, made it one of the top quartet of characteristics which he expected the statesman to show. A passage he penned as the First World War was about to end reads: “In war, resolution. In defeat, defiance. In victory, magnanimity. In peace, good will.” This is a sentiment which all those in public life should learn by heart. It encapsulates the lessons of history better than entire books.

* * *

I would like to end by stressing that my perception of heroic virtues is not inclusive. I merely stress the central and essential ones. One thing you learn from history is that a hero who can make the public laugh as well as admire is likely to have a strong and lasting hold on its affections. Here again Churchill stands high. He made us laugh even in the darkest days of 1940, when in reply to the Nazi jibe that “England in three weeks will have her neck wrung like a chicken,” he said, simply but forcefully: “Some chicken! Some neck!” As a teenager, when I had the chance to meet him in 1946, I was bold enough to ask: “Mr. Winston Churchill, sir, to what do you attribute your success in life?” He replied, instantly: “Conservation of effort: never stand up when you can sit down, and never sit down when you can lie down.” There was a delicious irony with which this supreme man of action put the case for the sedentary, even the supine. Abraham Lincoln, too, loved irony. He often achieved an effect with jokes where mere oratory would not work so well. And Mr. Reagan communicated and ruled through his enormous collection of one-liners, which he suited to all occasions. And a joke can often enshrine truth, as for instance when I heard him say: “I’m not too worried about the deficit. It’s big enough to take care of itself.”

Margaret Thatcher was often criticized for having no sense of humor. Not true. I once heard her tell a joke to great effect. At the end of a long wearisome dinner with ten speeches, she—as Prime Minister—was scheduled to speak at the end. I could see she was furious. She began: “As the last of ten speakers, and the only woman, I have this to say. The cock may crow, but it’s the hen who lays the eggs.” I think I was the only one to laugh. The rest were shocked. I reminded Mrs. Thatcher of this recently, and she was delighted. She said: “My father told me that joke.” And that itself is a reminder that we learn from our parents at the fireside in our childhood perhaps as much or more than from anyone. But from the heroes of the past we learn, too, and what they teach, by the example of their lives and words, has the special quality of truth by personal example. Thus the good hero lives on, in our minds, if we are imaginative, and in our actions, if we are wise.

Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.

Margaret Thatcher: A Rare and Highly Personal Interview in 1985

In a time when America's national leadership doesn't dare admit to its true agenda or call its ruinous Marxist philosophy by its proper name, this insightful and highly personal interview with Margaret Thatcher in 1985 is a reminder of what noble, highly principled leadership looks like.  

Emerson wrote that “When it is dark enough, men see the stars;” so it seems to be in discerning great leaders.  We can take hope in the knowledge that statesmen of Margaret Thatcher's caliber, and that of Ronald Reagan, come along when times are dark and they are most needed.  With the ruin of our nation at the hands of a man who daily violates his oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," surely great hearts and minds are being summoned, as was Thatcher, to put matters right.

Robin Harris - Not for Turning: The Life of Margaret Thatcher

Robin Harris worked for the Conservative Party from 1978, and increasingly closely with Margaret Thatcher herself from 1985, writing her speeches and advising on policy. By the close of her premiership, he was probably the most trusted member of her political team at Downing Street, and he left Number Ten with her. As a member of her personal staff, he then drafted the two volumes of her autobiography and a further book on her behalf. After Margaret Thatcher’s retirement from public life, Robin continued to see her regularly.

Why Ronald Reagan Towers Above Barack Obama as a World Leader

From The Telegraph

By Nile Gardiner

Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher: standing up to the Evil Empire

Today marks the 25th anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s famous “tear down this wall” speech delivered before the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin on June 12, 1987. It is a reminder not only of President Reagan’s oratorical brilliance but also of his steadfast leadership on the world stage. For the Gipper was a president who, together with Margaret Thatcher, brought down the might of the Soviet Empire, liberated hundreds of millions from Communist tyranny, and restored US leadership after the decline of the Carter years and the Vietnam era. Reagan was uncompromising in his opposition to the Soviet Union and his defence of freedom, driven by his belief in American exceptionalism and the unique role the United States must play in standing up to tyranny and advancing the cause of liberty.

For Ronald Reagan in 1987, West Berlin was the frontline in the war against Communism, a city the Russians had tried to strangle in 1948. He was determined to see the wall that divided Berlin’s three million inhabitants brought down, and the biggest symbol of Communist tyranny smashed to the ground. In his speech in Berlin, Reagan memorably declared

In the 1950's, Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you." But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind-too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.

…. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

Two decades later, for Barack Obama in 2008, Berlin was little more than a hubristic campaign stop where he could bask in the worship of adoring German youth en route to the White House, introducing himself as “a fellow citizen of the world.” A year on, as president, he could not even be bothered to attend the city’s celebrations commemorating the 20th anniversary of the downfall of the Berlin Wall in 2009, which National Review Editor Rich Lowry appropriately described at the time as “the most telling nonevent of his presidency.”

In so many respects Reagan’s firm leadership in the 1980s towers over that of Barack Obama today. It would be hard to imagine President Obama delivering an address with the power and moral conviction of President Reagan’s Berlin Wall speech. While Obama has apologised for his nation, Reagan stood tall for American greatness. While Obama has sought accommodation with some of America’s key adversaries, Reagan vowed to defeat them. While Obama is cutting US defence spending, closing several US bases in Europe, and scaling back American global power, Reagan believed in peace through strength, and rebuilding America’s military might.

Ronald Reagan will always be remembered by the people of Berlin and millions more across eastern and central Europe as the steadfast leader who fought for their freedom and refused to back down in the face of a brutal enemy that had oppressed a continent for nearly half a century. It is thanks to his vision and determination that the Soviet Empire was brought to its knees. As his closest friend and ally Margaret Thatcher put it in her eulogy to Reagan at the Washington National Cathedral in 2004:

Others prophesied the decline of the West. He inspired America and its allies with renewed faith in their mission of freedom… With the lever of American patriotism, he lifted up the world. And so today, the world – in Prague, in Budapest, in Warsaw and Sofia, in Bucharest, in Kiev, and in Moscow itself, the world mourns the passing of the great liberator and echoes his prayer: God bless America.

Nile Gardiner is a Washington-based foreign affairs analyst and political commentator. He appears frequently on American and British television, including Fox News Channel, CNN, BBC, and Fox Business Network.

Britain's Bishops at War: Head of Catholics Leads Furious Backlash after Archbishop of Canterbury's Attack on Coalition

From The Daily Mail

By James Chapman and Steve Doughty

The Archbishop of Canterbury is embroiled in an extraordinary war with David Cameron and rival Church leaders after a bitter attack on the Government.

In the most brazen political intervention by a head of the Church of England for more than two decades, Dr Rowan Williams questioned the democratic legitimacy of the Coalition.

He claimed 'no one voted' for flagship policies on welfare, health and education, which he said were causing 'anxiety and anger'.

The remarks prompted a furious backlash from the Prime Minister and the leader of England's Roman Catholics, Archbishop Vincent Nichols. Dr Williams's attack came in a leading article for the Left-wing New Statesman magazine which he had been invited to guest-edit.

Dr Rowan Williams, left, sparked a furious backlash from the Prime Minister and head of the Catholic Church in Britain, Archbishop Vincent Nichols

He dismissed Mr Cameron's Big Society initiative as 'painfully stale' and condemned 'punitive' action against 'alleged abuses' in the benefits system.

The Archbishop also accused ministers of encouraging a 'quiet resurgence of the seductive language of “deserving” and “undeserving” poor'.

Lady Thatcher Would Win Election Today

Victory in the Falklands conflict and the end of the Cold War
ranked among Mrs Thatcher's greatest achievements.

A new Telegraph YouGov poll provides clear evidence that the British people are ready to throw off Labour Party socialism and its obeisance to EU totalitarians and return to the free market growth and opportunity unleashed by Margaret Thatcher.

When asked "who is or was Britain's greatest post-war prime minister," Lady Thatcher far exceeds every other leader of government, including the post-war premiership of Winston Churchill (1951-1955). Mrs. Thatcher was ranked first by 75% of all Conservative voters, 27% of Liberal Democrats, and even 11% of Labour voters ranked Thatcher ahead of Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, and other Labour Prime Ministers. The poll also indicates that if voters could choose from an array of Tory and Labour politicians "at the peak of their powers to be Prime Minister today," Mrs. Thatcher would be easily elected.

The Telegraph's story about the poll is here.

Margaret Thatcher Named MOST Influential Woman of Last 200 Years

IRON Lady Margaret Thatcher is the most influential woman of the past 200 years, a poll has found.

Most think the formidable Conservative Prime Minister, who died in 2013 aged 87, the person who paved the way for others to smash the glass ceiling.

Her influence is such that 25 years after she stepped down she heads a glittering list including Nobel Prize winning scientist Marie Curie and suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst.

Mrs Thatcher, who occupied Number 10 between 1979 and 1990, used her handbag as an icon of her rule once telling an interviewer: "Of course, I am obstinate in defending our liberties and our law. That is why I carry a big handbag." She also said: "If you want something said, ask a man; if you want something done, ask a woman."

Read more >> 

 

Thatcher's Historic Trip To Poland

We know now of the extraordinary, coordinated efforts that were underway in the 1980's, among Pope John Paul II, President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, to free the enslaved peoples of Europe. Their efforts to foster a "new human relationship" in Polish society among church leaders, workers, farmers and intellectuals, received an enormous boost twenty years ago this month during a visit to Poland by Prime Minister Thatcher.

At a state banquet, Thatcher lashed out at General Wojciech Jaruzelski, stating that Poland's depressed economy would improve only after freedom and liberty were restored. She also insisted upon visiting the birthplace of the Solidarity Movement, the Gdansk Shipyard and the union's leaders. In an emotionally charged visit, Thatcher told 5,000 workers, "Nothing can stop you!" And indeed, nothing did.

The following June, Poland held the first free elections ever seen in the Communist bloc. Solidarity, with the help of two smaller parties, swept to power, and six months after that the Berlin Wall came crumbling down.

The following video recounts Thatcher's historic visit to Solidarity and the Polish shipyard workers:

America’s Growing Government Class

From The Center for Vision & Values

By Paul G. Kengor

The latest unemployment figures are again depressing, but not for the usual reasons. They provide further confirmation of Barack Obama’s fundamental transformation of America, specifically through his creation of a growing government class.

The numbers show a massive increase in government jobs created over the last five months—621,000, to be exact, dwarfing private-sector job growth. Those new government jobs account for a staggering 73 percent of overall job growth. In all, 21 million citizens now work for government, out of 143 million employed in America, or one in seven Americans.

Sir Roger Scruton: How to Be a Conservative

In the latest episode from Uncommon Knowledge, Sir Roger Scruton, a formally trained political philosopher, talks about his life and the events he’s witnessed that led him to conservatism. He first embraced conservatism after witnessing the leftist student protests in France in May 1968. During the ensuing riots in Paris, more than three hundred people were injured. Scruton walked away from this event with a change in worldview and a strong leaning toward conservatism. Visits to communist- controlled Poland and Czechoslovakia in 1979 cemented his preference for conservatism and his distaste for the fraud of communism and socialism, initiating a desire to do something about it. From thereon he dedicated himself to helping organize underground seminars for the young people oppressed behind the iron curtain. 

 

Sir Roger examines a brief history of conservatism in the twentieth century of England in regard to Margaret Thatcher and Winston Churchill. Although he appreciates what Margaret Thatcher stood for, he argues that she had many conservative ideals but never used the conservative framework to organize her overall political strategy. Instead she organized around market economics, which was not always effective in the social, cultural, and legal areas. Peter Robinson argues that Winston Churchill did a much better job of organizing around conservative ideals but eventually lost an election because he didn’t have the vocabulary or the focus on free markets. They discuss the tenuous relationship between free markets and conservative ideals that have not mixed well together in British politics. 

 

Robinson and Sir Roger discuss the 2016 political upset of Brexit in the United Kingdom and how the political analysts failed to predict the vote outcome, much like what happened in November 2016 in the United States. They deliberate how the issues around immigration from Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom contributed to Brexit, in addition to general dissatisfaction with the European Union. Thus, in the cases of both the United Kingdom and the United States, the media and intellectuals ignored the will of the “indigenous working classes” who made their voices known through their votes. 

 

About the Guest:

 

Sir Roger Scruton Sir Roger Scruton is an English writer and philosopher who has published more than fifty books in philosophy, aesthetics, and politics. His book discussed in this episode was How to Be a Conservative; it was published in 2014. He is a fellow of the British Academy and a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature. He teaches in both England and America and is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, Washington. DC. He is currently teaching an MA in philosophy course for the University of Buckingham. Sir Scruton was knighted in 2016 by Queen Elizabeth II for his “services to philosophy, teaching and public education.”

 

 

Roger Kimball: The Anglosphere and the Future of Liberty

A few days ago, The New Criterion and London’s Social Affairs Unit hosted a one-day conference about the future of the “special relationship” between Britain and the United States, with special reference to the contributions of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher in maintaining that filiation. It was a jolly and informative convocation. Among the participants were John O’Sullivan, a close advisor to Margaret Thatcher, and Peter Robinson who drafted Reagan’s famous “Mr. Gorbachev-Tear-Down-This-Wall” speech. Other paper-givers included Daniel Hannan, a conservative, euro-sceptic member of the European Parliament for southern England, Douglas Carswell, a eurosceptic MP for Claxton, and Keith Windschuttle, the historian editor of Australia’s best cultural magazine, Quadrant. If I am counting correctly, this was the twelfth such collaboration between these two organizations. Our stated purposed is to enhance and strengthen the transatlantic conversation on such subjects as limited government, individual liberty, and the the constellation of values adumbrated by the word “Anglosphere.”

What is the Anglosphere? I’m not sure who coined the term, but it was James Bennett, another participant, whose book The Anglosphere Challenge: Why the English-Speaking Nations Will Lead the Way in the Twenty-First Century that gave the word currency. As the title suggests, it is an optimistic, or at least an upbeat book. (Dr. Pangloss was an optimist, but somehow was always a source of gloom.) If the 19^th century was preeminently the British century in world affairs (and it was), the 20^th century belonged to the United States. And going forward? “If the English-speaking nations grasp the opportunity,” Bennett wrote at the end of his book, “the twenty-first century will be the Anglosphere century.”

Read more at PJ Media >>

Margaret Thatcher on the Anglo-American Relationship

The Anglo-American relationship is not some out-dated romantic notion, it reflects shared history, language, values, and ideals–the very things which generate that willingness for sacrifice on which the outcome of every military venture ultimately depends.

Western cooperation will also be easier if we re-assert, as I have been suggesting, the moral and cultural foundations of our Western world. In the Cold War years, we were able to persuade our populations that our values were worth fighting for. By re-iterating those values, we conservatives offer the best prospect of security, stability and peace.

The whole of this programme, like any political programme in the real world, has to adapt to circumstances. But what gives it such relevance and weight today is that it is the only one which recognises the over-riding importance of keeping the West strong and united.

Western civilization would not be the first to re-shape others in its own image, only to discover that it had lost the identity, confidence and will to survive: on this matter the historians of the Classical World could provide some useful lessons to today's Western liberal politicians.

The decline of the West has been predicted before, and it has not occurred. It need not occur. And it will not occur–if we conservatives keep faith in everything we have achieved and the bedrock principles which inspired us to prevail.

_____

1997 Sep 28 Su, Margaret Thatcher.
Speech to the First International Conservative Congress.

British Conservative Party's Tribute to Margaret Thatcher

The British Conservative Party has released a video tribute to Margaret Thatcher that will launch its party conference in Manchester tomorrow.   May this fitting tribute, entitled "Our Maggie", inspire them, their party leadership and freedom lovers throughout the world.

BBC Documentary: Margaret Thatcher - Long Walk to Finchley

This BBC documentary is a dramatization of Margaret Thatcher's early years in politics - culminating in her successful election as MP for Finchley.

Happy Birthday, President Reagan

It has been said that when it is dark enough, one can see stars.  In these dark days for our nation, President Reagan's greatness, optimism, joy and vision shine more brightly than ever.  Perhaps seeing in President Reagan, unconsciously, an image of herself, no one has paid more eloquent tribute to the late President than did Margaret Thatcher on his 83rd birthday (see below).  On this, the 103rd anniversary of President Reagan's birth, let us recall when these two great leaders reversed the decline of their nations, freed half a continent and inspired freedom loving people throughout the world.

The words of Longfellow eloquently describe the legacies of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher and their great partnership for good:

"So when a great man dies,
  For years beyond our ken,
The light he leaves behind him lies
  Upon the paths of men."  

Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them. May they rest in peace.  Amen. 

David Cameron's Address to the Conservative Party Conference 2013

This week in Manchester we’ve shown this Party is on the side of hardworking people.

Helping young people buy their own home. 

Getting the long-term unemployed back to work. 
 

Freezing fuel duty.
 
Backing marriage. 

Cutting the deficit.

Creating jobs.

Creating wealth.

Make no mistake: it is this Party with the verve, energy and ideas to take our country forward…

Thatcher: The Downing Street Years

This BBC documentary was made to coincide with the publication in 1993 of Lady Thatcher's memoirs, The Downing Street Years.  Even through the critical and biased filter of the BBC, the greatness of Margaret Thatcher and the accomplishments of her extraordinary eleven year premiership shine through.  In this presidential election year it is important that we remind ourselves of what principled, consistent, conservative leadership looks like. 

Freedom loving people throughout the world are indebted to this very great lady.

The EU Lisbon Treaty: Gordon Brown Surrenders Britain's Sovereignty

From The Heritage Foundation

by Nile Gardiner, Ph.D. and Sally McNamara

Prime Minister Gordon Brown's decision to reject a referendum on the new European Union Reform Treaty (Treaty of Lisbon) should be viewed as one of the biggest acts of political betrayal in modern British history. Despite a rebellion by 29 of its own backbenchers, the Labour-led government defeated a Conservative proposal to hold a popular vote on the Lisbon Treaty by 311 votes to 248 in the House of Commons on March 5. Brown's refusal to support a referendum represented a stunning reversal of the government's 2005 manifesto pledge to hold a plebiscite on the European Constitution.

The Commons vote flew in the face of fierce public opposition to the Lisbon Treaty and mounting calls for the British public to have its say. In a series of unofficial mini-referenda held across several marginal seats in early March, 89 percent of the more than 150,000 voters who took part voted against the treaty, with just 8 percent in favor.[1] These votes reflected consistently high levels of opposition to the treaty in virtually all major polls on the issue in the U.K. in the past few months.

Most British voters have already concluded that the Lisbon Treaty is almost identical to the old European Constitution, which was emphatically rejected by electorates in France and Holland in 2005. If ratified in all European capitals, the treaty will come into force in January 2009, and the implications for the future of Europe are immense. So far, only the Irish government has been brave enough to stand up to Brussels and insist on a popular vote by its citizens.

The new Treaty poses the biggest threat to national sovereignty in Europe since the Second World War, would threaten the future of the Anglo-American Special Relationship, and would significantly weaken the transatlantic alliance.

A Blueprint for a European Superstate

Like the rejected constitution, the new Reform Treaty is also a blueprint for a European superstate dreamt up by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. This time around, however, most of Europe doesn't get to vote, as democracy is too dangerous a concept for the architects of this grand vision of an EU superpower.

Originally envisioned as a single market within Europe, the EU (formerly European Economic Community) is morphing into a gigantic political entity with ambitions of becoming the world's first supranational superstate. Already, major strides have been made in the development of a unified European foreign and security policy as well as a supranational legal structure. With the introduction of the euro in 1999, the European single currency and European Central Bank became a reality.

Drafted in 2004, the European Constitution was a huge step forward in the evolution of what is commonly known as the "European Project," or the drive toward "ever closer union." With its 448 articles, the constitution was a vast vanity project, conceived in Paris, Berlin, and Brussels, that dramatically crashed to Earth three years ago. Since then, European Union apparatchiks have worked feverishly to resurrect the constitution, coming up with a cosmetic makeover that would make a plastic surgeon proud.

The new treaty contains all the main elements of the constitution, repackaged in flowery language. According to the European Scrutiny Committee, a British parliamentary body, only two of the treaty's 440 provisions were not contained in the original constitution.[2]

The Reform Treaty paves the way for the creation of a European Union foreign minister (high representative) at the head of an EU foreign service (with its own diplomatic corps) as well as a long-term EU president; both positions are trappings of a fledgling superstate. As European Parliament member Daniel Hannan has pointed out, the treaty will further erode the legal sovereignty of European nation-states, entrenching a pan-European magistracy ("Eurojust"), a European Public Prosecutor, a federal EU police force ("Europol"), and an EU criminal code ("corpus juris").[3] In addition, countries such as Britain will sacrifice their veto right over EU decision-making in 40 policy areas.

A Democratic Deficit

Europe doesn't need a constitution. The European Union is not the United States of Europe. The EU is a grouping of 27 independent nation-states, each with its own culture, language, heritage, and national interests. The EU works best as a single economic market that facilitates the free movement of goods, services, and people. It is far less successful as a political entity that tries to force its member states to conform to an artificial common identity.

The European Constitution and its successor treaty are all about the centralization of political power in the hands of a gilded ruling elite in Brussels, not the protection of individual liberty. They are also based on the principle that sovereignty should be pooled by nation-states for the "greater good" of Europe, a concept that goes against the grain of modern history, as witnessed with the break-up of the old Soviet Empire.

The notion that the people of Europe should not have a vote on a treaty with huge implications for the future of the continent demonstrates the utter contempt that the Brussels bureaucracy has for the average man or woman on the street. There is no doubt that if the treaty were put to a popular vote, the electorates of several countries would reject it. The whole "European Project" is fundamentally undemocratic, unaccountable, and opaque. If subjected to referenda across the EU, it would almost certainly be consigned to the dustbin of history.

A Threat to the Special Relationship

For both sides of the Atlantic, the Lisbon Treaty is bad news. The treaty poses a massive threat to the future of the Anglo-American Special Relationship as well as the broader transatlantic alliance. It will further entrench Europe's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP), both major threats to the future of NATO, and will seriously impair the ability of America's allies in Europe to stand alongside the United States where and when they choose to do so.

An America without Britain alongside it would be far more isolated and friendless and significantly less able to project power on the world stage. For Washington, there is no real alternative to the Special Relationship. Its collapse would be damaging to America's standing as a global power and would significantly weaken her leadership of the war against Islamist terrorism.

A Future British Government Must Hold a Referendum

The next British government, which must be elected by 2010 at the latest, should listen to the growing calls of the British people for a vote on the Lisbon Treaty. The public should have the final say on an agreement that will dramatically undermine the U.K.'s ability to shape her own destiny. If, as is highly likely, the public rejects the treaty, Britain should withdraw from its provisions and seek a broader renegotiation of its relationship with the European Union.

The next Prime Minister, if Brown is replaced, should heed the words of Lady Thatcher, who wrote in her seminal book Statecraft: "That such an unnecessary and irrational project as building a European superstate was ever embarked upon will seem in future years to be perhaps the greatest folly of the modern era."[4] The Iron Lady's instincts are right: Common sense must prevail, and the British people should have the freedom to reject an Orwellian vision of Europe's future in favor of the principles of sovereignty and freedom.

Nile Gardiner, Ph.D., is the Director of, and Sally McNamara is Senior Policy Analyst in European Affairs in, the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation. Erica Munkwitz assisted with research for this paper.

---

[1]Toby Helm, "Poll Shows Overwhelming Support for EU Referendum," The Daily Telegraph, March 3, 2008, at www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/02/neu102.xml.

[2]"Q&A: EU Treaty," The Daily Telegraph, October 14, 2007, at www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/14/nbrown214.xml.

[3]Daniel Hannan, MEP, "Those Euro-Myths Exploded," The Daily Telegraph, October 19, 2007, at http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/danielhannan/october/euromythsexploded.htm.

[4]Margaret Thatcher, Statecraft: Strategies for a Changing World (London: HarperCollins, 2002), p. 410.

Top Conservative Colleges 2009-2010

Young America’s Foundation today announced the sixth annual “Top Conservative College” list in response to the frequently asked question by parents and students of which schools they recommend to those seeking conservative colleges.

The 2009-2010 Top Conservative College list includes Christendom College, College of the Ozarks, Franciscan University, Grove City College, Harding University, Hillsdale College, The King's College, Liberty University, Patrick Henry College, Regent University, Saint Vincent College, Thomas Aquinas College, Thomas More College, and Wisconsin Lutheran College.

Introduction

A wide variety of rankings exist for the market of American colleges and universities. Each year, U.S. News & World Report releases its “America’s Best Colleges” edition. The magazine grades each institution based on factors including peer assessment, graduation and retention rates, faculty resources, and student selectivity. Yet, U.S. News does not rank the overall experience that colleges offer. That is why Young America’s Foundation presents the following list of institutions that offer a conservative experience for students. Young America’s Foundation deemed these institutions the best, and they are listed in alphabetical order.

Many conservative students seek alternatives in higher education, but they may not be fully aware of institutions that fit these criteria. The 2009-2010 “Top Conservative College” list features institutions that proclaim, through their mission and programs, a dedication to discovering, maintaining, and strengthening the conservative values of their students.

These colleges offer an alternative to the liberal status quo, because they allow and encourage conservative students to explore conservative ideas and authors. They offer coursework and scholarship in conservative thought and emphasize principles including smaller government, strong national defense, free enterprise, and traditional values. Furthermore, they avoid trends in academe by continuing to study Western Civilization instead of straying toward the study of Marxism, feminism, sexuality, postmodernism, and other distractions that do not give students a complete understanding of our country, our culture, and its founding principles.

Young America’s Foundation highly recommends service academies such as West Point and Annapolis for people interested in serving their country and receiving a top-notch education. However, these schools do not appear on our list. They are not liberal arts colleges but rather military colleges that follow a training model for future officers. There is nothing more honorable than serving our country, and we strongly encourage qualified students to consider this option.

This is not an exhaustive list of conservative institutions and should not be taken as such. Nor should it be the only source consulted in a college search. Young America’s Foundation recommends that this list serve as a starting point. Parents and students should seek several information sources, read admissions materials thoroughly, consult with friends and counselors, and make visits. Additionally, Young America’s Foundation is not a college rating organization; we decided to publish this list to help address a frequently asked question.

If you would like to recommend other colleges for this list, please contact Young America’s Foundation at 800-USA-1776 or visit their homepage.

Christendom College

Christendom College in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia is a Catholic college with more than 400 undergraduates. Six majors and a master’s degree in theological studies are offered. All undergraduate programs begin with a core curriculum that includes study of Catholic doctrine, as well as philosophy, mathematics, and science.

The college was founded in 1977 by a group of Catholics concerned with the direction of higher education, especially within the Catholic church. “Only an education which integrates the truths of the Catholic faith throughout the curriculum is a fully Catholic education,” stated the founders. Led by Dr. Warren H. Carroll, the visionaries also envisioned how, “the only rightful purpose of education is to know the truth and to live by it. The purpose of Catholic education is therefore to learn and to live by the truth revealed by Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ…”

The original vision of Christendom lives today through the institution’s devotion to Catholic theology and way of life. The core curriculum reinforces a Catholic worldview and teaches students to “distinguish truth from error or distortion, and then to communicate truth accurately, effectively, and convincingly to others.” Required courses include “Literature of Western Civilization,” “Introduction to Philosophy,” and “Fundamentals of Catholic Doctrine.”

For more information, contact Christendom College:

Christendom College Admissions

134 Christendom Drive

Front Royal, Virginia 22630

(800) 877-5456

College of the Ozarks

The College of the Ozarks is a unique Christian Work College with about 1,400 students, located in Point Lookout, Missouri. Dubbed as “Hard Work U.” by The Wall Street Journal, it has a special work-study program in which students work in lieu of paying tuition.

In addition to the 41 majors, 38 minors, and eight pre-professional programs it offers, the College of the Ozarks has an extensive character education program. As soon as students arrive for freshman orientation, they begin character education programs and abide by a dress code and an honor code.

A core liberal arts curriculum is required of all students, and an optional character-based curriculum is available. The general education curriculum is “purposefully complemented by an emphasis on the development of vital competencies,” such as writing, critical thinking, and interdisciplinary connections. Overall, the College of the Ozarks offers a robust array of programs and excellent opportunities to receive a well-rounded education.

One of the most distinctive features of the College of the Ozarks is the work-study program. All students work 15 hours per week instead of paying tuition. Many students find interesting jobs at the College such as working at the College’s own restaurant and lodge, print shop, landscaping department, or on the farm. Two 40-hour weeks are also required during longer breaks, including Christmas or Easter.

For more information, contact College of the Ozarks:

College of the Ozarks Admissions

P.O. Box 17

Point Lookout, Missouri 65726

(800) 222-0525

Franciscan University

Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio is a dynamic Catholic university with 2,049 undergraduate students and 400 graduate students. Majors are available in more than 40 undergraduate subjects, and the college offers 33 undergraduate minors and seven graduate programs. As a devoutly Catholic institution, Franciscan lives by a conservative intellectual and social philosophy based on the strong liberal arts tradition and the teachings of the Catholic church.

Many of Franciscan’s programs are devoted to obtaining a deeper knowledge of the history, philosophy, and culture that shaped Western Civilization. For example, the university offers five specific programs in which students learn directly about Western Civilization and the role of the Catholic church in its formation. Franciscan also offers an honors program devoted to great books of the Western world.

Many faculty members have distinguished themselves in conservative scholarship. Political science professor Dr. Stephen Krason penned books about the founding fathers and the Constitution. Legal Studies program director Brian Scharnecchia authored a three-volume work outlining and advocating a conservative approach to family issues. The University sponsors the nation’s only human life studies minor, which teaches students to think, speak, and act intelligently on human life issues. Using reason and logic, the newly-established Institute of Bioethics at Franciscan University sponsors forums and provides advanced training for students on abortion, euthanasia, the institution of marriage and other ethical issues that impact society.

Campus life at Franciscan is different than most colleges. More than 700 students join small faith-sharing groups called "households." Through sports, Bible study, prayer, and other social activities, households provide an essential bonding experience that parallels the mission of the university. A large portion of the student body’s free time is spent serving the community and attending Mass held on campus.

A factor that distinguishes Franciscan is the student body’s devotion to activism on traditional religious values. Public policy, civic participation, and conservative activism groups remain popular among students.

For more information, contact Franciscan University:

Franciscan University Admissions
1235 University Boulevard
Steubenville, Ohio 43952
(800) 783-6220

Grove City College

Grove City College is a Christian college located just north of Pittsburgh with 2,500 students. It offers 41 undergraduate majors. Its mission is to offer a rigorous academic education in a thoroughly Christian environment at an affordable cost.

As a liberal arts institution, its web site also states: “Rejecting relativism and secularism, [Grove City College] fosters intellectual, moral, spiritual, and social development consistent with a commitment to Christian truth, morals, and freedom.” The atmosphere created at Grove City College through its policies and programs encourages “the spiritual, moral, intellectual, and character development” of its students and staff. Young America’s Foundation has a warm relationship with Grove City College. Students almost always attend Foundation programs and there will be a Foundation high school conference at Grove City College in the summer of 2010.

Grove City has a commitment to conservative scholarship in various fields. For example, Dr. Paul Kengor (political science) has written several best-selling books and is an expert in the American presidency. He is also executive director of the College’s think tank, The Center for Vision & Values. Dr. Tracy Miller (economics) has published articles examining international and agricultural economics and economic development. Many of Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises’ papers are housed and researched at the College. In addition, Grove City boasts a strong department of religion and a major in entrepreneurship. Engineering (ABET-accredited programs in mechanical and electrical engineering), education and business round out the most popular majors.

Additionally, The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College is a think tank offering annual conferences, noted speakers and a chance for faculty members and fellows to share their editorials in media outlets around the country. The Center also produces numerous white papers on social, business, and economic subjects.

Given its legal and financial independence from the federal government, Grove City College’s tuition, room and board are surprisingly low. Annual tuition is less than half the national average for four-year private institutions, and room and board is one-third less than the national average for such institutions, thanks to the College’s fiduciary responsibility. It also has a private loan program as well as its own private need-based and merit-based scholarship program. As a result, Grove City has been called a “best value” in America in higher education time and time again.

For more information, contact Grove City College:

Grove City College
100 Campus Drive
Grove City, Pennsylvania 16127
(724) 458-2100

Harding University

Harding University in Searcy, Arkansas is a robust Christian college with 6,500 students. Ninety majors, thirteen pre-professional programs, and twelve graduate and professional degrees encompass the academic offerings. As the largest private university in Arkansas, Harding offers a well-rounded intellectual experience in a Biblical context. The Honors College also offers in-depth and supplementary study for accelerated students.

Majors from all programs are required to fulfill liberal arts requirements that include seven categories: spiritual and moral values, communications and critical thinking, the individual and social environment, the natural world, the creative spirit, the historical perspective, and global literacy. A moral code signed by all students creates an atmosphere where everyone is held to high standards.

Each year, Harding students participate in a variety of programs from the American Studies Institute, including the Distinguished Lecture Series. Young America’s Foundation is proud to co-sponsor several lectures each year that expose students to conservative ideas. Past speakers include Margaret Thatcher, John Ashcroft, William F. Buckley Jr., Sean Hannity, Zell Miller, Lech Walesa, and J.C. Watts.

Harding’s American Studies Institute puts a strong emphasis on its entrepreneurial development programs. For example, the Belden Center for Private Enterprise Education, led by noted scholar Dr. Don Diffine, educates students on the importance of freedom and private enterprise in relation to the success of business.

For more information, contact Harding University:

Harding University Admissions

915 E. Market Street

Searcy, Arkansas 72143

(501) 279-4000

Hillsdale College

Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan is a liberal arts college with 1,300 students. Offering 34 traditional majors, eight interdisciplinary majors, and nine pre-professional programs, Hillsdale consistently ranks highly nationwide in U.S. News & World Report and Forbes magazine, among other publications. Its core curriculum exemplifies the tradition of a classic liberal arts program. All students, regardless of major, are required to take courses in humanities, natural science, and social science during their first two years. Highly respected conservative professors teach at Hillsdale including Dr. Burt Folsom (history), Dr. Ivan Pongracic (economics), and Dr. Mickey Craig (political science).

Students at this southern Michigan campus hear from one of the largest and most distinguished lecture programs in the country. Hillsdale’s Center for Constructive Alternatives (CCA) has sponsored more than 1,100 speakers since 1971, including conservative luminaries such as Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and Walter Williams. Students are required to attend two hours of CCA seminars in order to graduate.

Independence is an important theme at Hillsdale. Upon its founding in 1844, it was the nation’s first college to prohibit discrimination based on race, sex, or religion in its charter. Ever since, the institution has not taken a penny from the federal government. When some students received federal loans in the 1970s, Hillsdale quickly reacted by maintaining independence and rejecting government quotas. Even given the absence of government funding, Hillsdale remains a great value because it continually provides privately funded financial aid packages.

Hillsdale provides students with a well-rounded education that focuses on liberty. Students learn what liberty means and the moral conditions of its preservation. They develop the skills to be productive citizens and the character to be good ones. The mission statement sums up the college well. It reads: “The College considers itself a trustee of modern man’s intellectual and spiritual inheritance from the Judeo-Christian faith and Greco-Roman culture, a heritage finding its clearest expression in the American experiment of self-government under law.”

For more information, contact Hillsdale College:

Hillsdale College Admissions

33 East College Street

Hillsdale, Michigan 49242

(517) 607-2327

The King’s College

The King’s College in New York City is a growing Christian college in the Empire State Building. Their 2009-2010 class added 130 new students to the mid-town Manhattan site to bring enrollment to 300. The King’s College expects more than 200 new students in the fall for a total student body of 450 for the 2010-2011 academic year.

King’s emphasizes a core curriculum that stresses western civilization, writing, politics, philosophy, and economics. King’s graduates learn to contrast ideas based on eternal truths with trendy ideologies that come and go. They are prepared to serve in and eventually lead eight strategic institutions: government, law, business, media, the arts, civil society, education and the church.

The campus located in New York City allows for the campus art gallery to be the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the performing arts center to be Broadway, the library to be the New York Public Library, and the quad to be Central Park. Students eat, shop, study and play in the heart of one of the world’s most influential cities. When it is time to intern, they go to places like Oppenheimer or CBS News.

The King’s College academics feature three majors: Politics, Philosophy and Economics (modeled after Oxford); Business; and Media, Culture, and the Arts. Professors include renowned Christian and conservative authors like Anthony Bradley, Peter Kreeft, Joe Loconte, Udo Middelmann, Anne Hendershott and Marvin Olasky. Adjunct writing professors come from the National Review, the Wall Street Journal, and World.

All students are members of “houses,” groups of students named after greats like C.S. Lewis, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Students this past year experienced leadership first hand by building an award-winning debate team and starting a variety of student organizations.

For more information, please contact The King’s College:

The King’s College

The Office of Admissions

350 5^th Avenue, Suite 1500

New York, NY 10018

212-659-7200

Liberty University

Liberty University, founded in 1971 by the Rev. Jerry Falwell, is located on 6,000 acres in scenic Lynchburg, Virginia. It is the largest evangelical university in the world. Total enrollment is more than 60,000 students, including the distance learning program. The chancellor of Liberty University is Jerry Falwell, Jr.

The mission of Liberty University is, “to develop Christ-centered men and women with the values, knowledge, and skills essential to impact tomorrow’s world.” A common motto of the late Rev. Jerry Falwell for Liberty University was, “if it’s Christian it should be better.”

In turn, Liberty offers 115 undergraduate areas of study, 24 graduate areas of study and 3 doctoral programs. Notable schools include the Liberty University School of Law, the Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, and the Jesse Helms School of Government.

Liberty University students are known for their theologically, socially, and fiscally conservative views on issues like “…an absolute repudiation of ‘political correctness,’ a strong commitment to political conservatism, total rejection of socialism, and firm support for America’s economic system of free enterprise,” among other things.

The experience at Liberty does not stop with the classroom. Dormitories are supervised by a small army of “student leaders” who work to maintain the spiritual and social health of the halls. Liberty mentors one student leader for every five residential students, assuring that no single student is left without adequate social, spiritual, and academic support.

The thrice-weekly, university-wide chapel service plays hosts to 60 national leaders each school year. It is considered to be a required stop on the national, conservative campaign trail, and it is North America's largest weekly gathering of Christian young people. In addition, the university has gathered dozens of “Big South Conference Championships” through its 20 NCAA Division 1 sports, it has a national champion debate team, Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) programs, and hosts numerous special conferences devoted to Biblical and contemporary issues.

For more information, contact Liberty University:

Liberty University Admissions
1971 University Boulevard
Lynchburg, Virginia 24502
(434) 582-2000

Patrick Henry College

Patrick Henry College in Purcellville, Virginia is a classical Christian college with nearly 400 students, located 40 miles from Washington, D.C. Founded in 2000, PHC offers major tracks in Classical Liberal Arts, History, Literature, American Politics, International Politics, Political Theory, Strategic Intelligence, and Journalism. With a comprehensive, 63-credit common core curriculum PHC rigorously grounds students in the great books of Western Civilization, history, philosophy, logic, and the foundations of freedom. Its motto, “Pro Christo et Libertate” (For Christ and For Liberty), embodies its mission.

College President Graham Walker describes the College’s aim as “fearless learning in the spirit of the American Founding.” As he explains, the curriculum “starts with Jesus Christ, in whom ‘all things hold together’ (Colossians 1:17). The faculty insist on accountability to facts, defending reason because of faith. Every student gets a foundation in classical learning and grapples with the full range of ideas, both good and bad, that have dominated our civilization. We equip students to ‘test all things’ and ‘hold fast that which is good’ (1 Thessalonians 5:21).”

Distinguished faculty members lead this effort. The College’s Chancellor, Dr. Michael Farris, has authored 14 books including two constitutional law textbooks, and has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. He was awarded the Heritage Foundation’s Salvatori Award for American Citizenship. The College’s Provost, Dr. Gene Edward Veith, is a longtime educator, cultural commentator, and author of over 100 published articles and 17 books on subjects ranging from classical Christian education and postmodernism to literature and vocation. Other noted faculty scholars include well-known journalist Dr. David Aikman, and author and apologetics expert Dr. John Warwick Montgomery.

Apprenticeship learning is the culminating step of a classical education at Patrick Henry College. This requires students to gain practical experience and conduct research through top-level internships in Washington, D.C. and beyond. Complementing its mission to engage culture, the forensics program at PHC has earned a national reputation as a legal debate force, winning national championships four of the past six years and sending members on to the nation’s top law and graduate schools, including Harvard, Duke, Georgetown and the University of Virginia.

Patrick Henry College’s unique strategic intelligence concentration in the Department of Government immerses students in intelligence analysis, investigative techniques, open source data exploitation, counter-intelligence, counter-terrorism, and information dissemination. Strategic intelligence students at PHC participate in prestigious apprenticeships with the FBI, the CIA, and in local police departments.

For more information, contact Patrick Henry College:

Patrick Henry College Admissions

One Patrick Henry Circle

Purcellville, VA 20132

(888) 338-1776

Regent University

Founded in 1978, Regent University has more than 4,800 students studying on its campus in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and online around the world. Regent offers associate’s, bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees from a Christian perspective in fields including business, communication and the arts, divinity, education, government, law, leadership, and psychology and counseling. In addition to the rigorous academic environment, Regent offers other unique opportunities.

The Ronald Reagan Symposium, held each year in conjunction with the former president's birthday, features nationally and internationally known scholars, including Harvey Mansfield (Harvard), William Kristol (Weekly Standard), Michael Barone (Washington Examiner and FOXNews), Jean Bethke Elshtain (Chicago), and George Nash (The Russell Kirk Center). Reagan Symposium topics have included "The Future of Conservatism" and "The Future of American Culture." Each Symposium comes out as a scholarly book. For example, The New York Times published a long and favorable review on "The Future of Conservatism: Conflict and Consensus in the Post-Reagan Era."

Clash of the Titans®, annually showcases debates between leading political heavyweights, such as Lt. Col. Oliver North, Mike Huckabee, Arianna Huffinington, Steve Forbes, Howard Dean, Geraldine Ferraro, Alan Colmes, Newt Gingrich and Ehud Barak, debating the war in Iraq, presidential elections, peace in the Middle East, and the American economic crisis.

Regent’s monthly Executive Leadership Series brings a cross-section of preeminent leaders to campus. Among them are Rudy Giuliani, Dick Morris, Maria Bartiromo, John Maxwell, Art Williams, Barbara Corcoran and Zig Ziglar.

"Christian Leadership to Change the World," Regent's motto since its founding, motivates its resolve to offer unparalleled opportunities. The Governor of Virginia, Bob McDonnell, and thousands of other alumni got their start at Regent University.

For more information, please contact Regent University :

Regent University Admissions

1000 Regent University Drive

Virginia Beach, Virginia 23464

(888) 718-1222

Saint Vincent College

Saint Vincent College is a traditional Catholic college in rural Pennsylvania, just outside Pittsburgh. With almost 1,700 students, it offers a comprehensive liberal arts program in the Benedictine tradition.

Archabbot Wimmer, the founder of St. Vincent College, noted that students should learn “first what is necessary, then what is useful, and finally what is beautiful and will contribute to their refinement.” The college continues that vision with a strong core curriculum promoting hard work and the study of philosophy. In addition, St. Vincent boasts a strong writing program and is committed to theology, mathematics, and the natural sciences in the core curriculum.

The student life at St. Vincent is unique given its proximity to the monastery and influence of the Benedictine community. The college is committed to service learning and volunteering. Everyone in the first-year class participates in an orientation community service event. There is a very active campus ministry, and President Jim Towey takes a service group of 12 students each year to serve in Mother Theresa’s mission in Calcutta.

The Alex G. McKenna School of Economics and Government highlights conservative ideas through its programs including the Center for Political and Economic Thought, where internationally recognized guests interact with students and faculty through lectures and events. A focus on philosophy and principles instead of current events and polling data, especially in political science, allows students to learn more deeply about the importance of Western civilization.

For more information, please contact Saint Vincent College

Saint Vincent College

300 Fraser Purchase Road

Latrobe, Pennsylvania 15650

(724) 537-4540

Thomas Aquinas College

Thomas Aquinas College is a small Catholic college located in southern California with 351 students. No majors or minors are offered since all students participate in the prescribed great books curriculum. The somewhat secluded location in the hills of rural southern California provides a metaphor for the unique nature of this fine institution.

The “great books” of Western civilization comprise the entire curriculum of Thomas Aquinas College, and all students graduate with a Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Arts. Works on many subjects are included in the program, including music, mathematics, and science as well as philosophy, language, and theology. Faculty members serve less as lecturers and more as facilitators using the Socratic method. Catholic faculty members publicly take the Oath of Fidelity and make a Profession of Faith at the beginning of their terms in office.

Campus life at Thomas Aquinas follows with traditional Catholic morality and teaching, and there are many groups in which students participate. For example, the St. Genesius Players is a drama group that puts on productions, the choir often performs, and the “bushwhackers” maintain local trails and organize hiking trips. Student groups are also involved with activism on issues related to traditional religious values.

For more information, please contact Thomas Aquinas College:

Thomas Aquinas College Admissions

10000 North Ojai Road

Santa Paula, California 93060

(800) 634-9797

Thomas More College

The Thomas More College of Liberal Arts is a four-year undergraduate college in Merrimack, New Hampshire that carefully guides students through the best that has been written and thought throughout the history of Western civilization and the Catholic intellectual tradition. Thomas More College is a college where parents can be confident that their children will receive a liberal arts education that is rigorous and well-grounded in the permanent things, preparing them for whatever work they may be called upon to perform in the world.

Students graduate from Thomas More College with a full knowledge of the literature, politics, philosophy, art, and architecture that has contributed to the development and formation of the Church, Western civilization, America’s constitutional order. The read the works of such luminary figures as Hayek, Kirk, Weaver, Friedman, Dawson, Burke, Eliot, Homer, Plato, Cicero, Augustine, Aquinas, Dante, Shakespeare, Milton, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison.

In addition to mastering a wide array of readings, our students come to understand why they should learn what they learn; why certain authors are giants; why greatness in literary capability must not be equated with greatness in moral capability; and how the humanistic tradition of the West is their inheritance and will shape their lives.

One of the hallmarks of the educational experience students receive at Thomas More College is a full semester spent in Rome, Italy, during their sophomore year. Living and studying in Rome need little justification: the experience of the city gives immediacy and substance to the broad range of studies at the College, awakening the student to the significance of Rome on the formation of Western civilization and the Catholic Church. As importantly, the Roman Republic was a major influence on America’s Founders as they sought to establish a republic in the New World. By studying and experiencing first hand Roman institutions, students come to understand the significance of and develop a greater appreciation for the American experiment.

By providing students with a deep understanding of first principles, training them to think and write clearly, and preparing them for public speaking, Thomas More College is engaging in the indispensible task of nurturing a new generation of leaders who are prepared to defend the Christian and free market roots of our society throughout their lives.

For more information, please contact Thomas More College:

Thomas More College of Liberal Arts

6 Manchester Street

Merrimack, New Hampshire 03054

(603) 880-8308

Wisconsin Lutheran College

Wisconsin Lutheran College, with an enrollment of nearly 785, is a four-year liberal arts Christian college located in Milwaukee. Founded in 1973, it is committed to providing quality teaching, scholarship, and service that are rooted in Holy Scripture, promoting the spiritual growth of students, faculty, and staff; and preparing students for lives of Christian service.

The college offers 30 undergraduate majors, pre-professional programs in pre-dental, pre-law, pre-medicine, pre-pharmacy, and pre-veterinary medicine, and three degrees; a bachelor of arts, bachelor of science, and bachelor of science in nursing. Wisconsin Lutheran is known for its academic excellence, its strong athletics and fine arts programming, and its thorough preparation in producing Christian leaders as graduates.

Wisconsin Lutheran College prepares students to become leaders in their chosen academic field. Taught from a Christian perspective, the college’s courses help students develop skills they’ll need in their career: critical thinking, communication, teamwork, and decision-making. Wisconsin Lutheran’s professors foster challenging academic experiences, giving their students a solid basis for graduate work or for their future career in an ever-changing, challenging world.

In addition to ongoing classroom learning, guest speakers such as U.S. Ambassador Jean Kirkpatrick, former Vice President Dan Quayle, Starr Parker, Michael Medved, Tony Snow, and other nationally known conservative leaders have lectured on campus, sharing their perspectives and insights with Wisconsin Lutheran College students.

For eight consecutive years, U.S. News & World Report has ranked Wisconsin Lutheran College as one of “America’s Best Colleges.” Forbes.com also includes Wisconsin Lutheran in its rankings of America’s best undergraduate institutions.

Wisconsin Lutheran College’s vision is to strive to establish a distinctive identity as one of America’s finest liberal arts colleges characterized by faithfulness to the Scriptures and to the Lutheran Confessions, rigorous pursuit of academic excellence, and dedication to preparing Christian leaders for the Church and the world.

For more information, please contact Wisconsin Lutheran College:

Wisconsin Lutheran College Admissions

8800 West Bluemound Rd.

Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53226

(414) 443-8811