Community Experience Outweighs Political Narratives

I have been a Warren County resident and taxpayer for over 20 years. I am a member of St. John Bosco parish in Woodstock, a graduate of Christendom College (’03)  and a mother of six.

Samuels has been a faithful and trusted institution of this county for all of the twenty plus years I have lived here. They have bent over backwards to help the larger-than-average homeschooling community in our area and have worked tirelessly to support education and access in our community for the poor, handicapped, and underserved. We continue to hear time and time again, from multiple people in all walks of life, that the experience of Samuels by the entire community over the decades has been overwhelmingly positive and beneficial.

Against this outstanding reputation, the current narrative put forward by the newly-created library board manifests as public slander.  One example of the twisting of accounts by the library board is the accusation made by Mr. Belk of the library holding a “secret meeting.” I attended the BOS meeting on March 4th in which he recommended this secrecy as grounds for cancelling funding of Samuels by the county. Yet, it was clear from Mr. Belk’s own slides that the BOS was included in the email about the library meeting. BOS member Cheryll Cullers’ address was clearly listed on the email in the slides Mr. Belk himself displayed.

In light of this evidence I am confronted with an uncomfortable comparison.

I am presented with a narrative about Samuels, stirred up in its inception by an internet group, motivated by political activism, and headed and organized by individuals who would not publicly release their names. I am asked to believe the claims of a newly-created library board, at least one of whom themself was at least indirectly affiliated with this original group. While many who flooded the library with forms do not claim formal participation in said group they were nonetheless directly aligned with its aims and methods and taking advice from a group who refused to release names publicly. This group was also responsible for the public slander of several Christendom professors, a matter which was itself never satisfactorily addressed. The account put forward by the new library board, simply does not hold up to more than twenty years of personal relationship with the library, as well as the vast majority of experiences of the members of Warren county of the library.

The accusations by the library board are either untrue, that is built on aggression and slander or unjust, that is, bent on a preferred outcomes over just means. As far as can be determined they appear to violate one of the most fundamental Christian ethical rules:  “The end does not justify the means.”

It is unfortunate that, according to Virginia law, an addendum cannot be added to the ballot for the citizens of Warren county to vote on the library funding directly.  I spoke with both Dr. Jamison and Cheryll Cullers on the phone last week and they confirmed this. I thank them both for their kindness in listening to my concerns. It is hoped that  BOS will respond thoughtfully to the wants and desires of its constituents, which so many of them have voiced personally, and move to reverse the hasty measures it took on March 4th.

In the particular context of this situation, weighted as it is by two years of aggressive coordinated political techniques bent on outcomes over means, and directly associated with the public slandering of men and women of good standing in our community, Samuels should receive full funding  for the following year. Given the secrecy of the original group who mounted the campaign to flood the library with forms, this is the just, ethical and responsible outcome. I pray for continued healing and understanding between both sides of this issue.

Anna Hatke
Warren County, VA

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the letters published on this page are solely those of the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Royal Examiner’s editorial team, its affiliates, or advertisers. The Royal Examiner does not endorse or take responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or validity of any statements made by the authors. The Royal Examiner has not independently verified the statements and claims presented in the letters. Readers are encouraged to exercise their own judgment and critical thinking skills when evaluating the content. Any reliance on the information in the letters is at the reader’s own risk.

While the Royal Examiner makes every effort to publish diverse opinions, it does not guarantee the publication of all received letters. The Royal Examiner reserves the right to edit letters for clarity, length, and adherence to editorial guidelines. Moreover, the Royal Examiner does not assume any liability for any loss or damage incurred by readers due to the content of the letters or any subsequent actions based on these opinions.

In submitting a letter to the editor, authors grant the newspaper the right to publish, edit, reproduce, or distribute the content in print, online, or in any other form.

We value the engagement of our readers and encourage open and constructive discussions on various topics. However, the Royal Examiner retains the right to reject any letter that contains offensive language, personal attacks, or violates any legal regulations. Thank you for being a part of our vibrant community of readers and contributors, and we look forward to receiving your diverse perspectives on matters of interest and importance.