Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 4—THE BULLETIN, May 14, 1960
The Peacemaker
Shortly after this editorial was written the U. S. State Depart
ment apparently admitted that the American plane was on an espio
nage flight, but we see no reason to delete the following editorial or
change any of the sentiments contained therein.
A few short months ago Nikita Khrushchev was received in
this country as the head of a great and powerful Nation, Soviet
Russia. He was hailed by harrassed statesmen with strained and
artificial cordiality, and greeted by fawning and flattering “in
tellectuals” as the jovial jongleur of a “much maligned, but basic
ally peace-loving people.”
“If only we show him what America is really like,” was the
cry. “he will see that we mean his country no harm and soon we
will have real peace.” And then, appropriately enough, his tour
was capped with a visit to an Iowa farm, where the REAL tall
corn grows.
Of course, after the tumult and the shouting had ended many
realized how silly they looked, wearing rose colored glasses, and
sheepishly cast them away together with the foolish fancy that a
“brave new world” can be founded upon the shifting sands of
smiles and sentimentality.
But the last few weeks of the “Foolish Fifties” did leave their
casualties, and many, who before had possessed perfect 20-20
vision remained blinded by the smile of the Red Chief and en
chanted by his homey homilies and provincial proverbs. Many,
too, even managed to convince themselves that the sheep could
now lie safely with the wolf and that the devil REALLY a monk
would be.
Last Thursday Khrushchev was in his own country. Gone were
the jokes and proverbs. Gone, too, were the smiles and pleas for
‘competition, not conflict; trust, not threats; peace and prosperity
for all the world.” ^
With all the righteous indignation of a poseur extraordinaire
he announced that the United States had launched an “act of
aggression” against the Soviet Union, but that the “aggression”
had been bravely repelled by the valiant Red Air Force. The
aggressor a lone, unarmed American weather plane, manned by
a civilian pilot.
The story is not new. We have heard it several times in the
past. And once again, as in the past, Americans will have to swal
low their National Pride, embracing the frustration which walks
hand in hand with fifteen years of “proving our good faith and
peaceful intentions” to the Soviets. Once again Americans must
suffer the indignity of proving to a world which owes what limited
peace it enjoys largely to us, and we did not, in fact, commit an
act of aggression” against the one great power in the world whose
strength and position is founded almost entirely upon the lifeless
corpses of countless innocent people.
Yet, it may be that there is something to be salvaged. Surely
it is not too much to hope that the Russian shells which destroyed
another unarmed American plane have also shattered the roseate
spectacles of some more of our apostles of “peaceful co-existence,
mutual trust and brotherhood between our two countries,” and
blown the Russian missile dust from their eyes.
Surely, too, it is not too much to hope that now there are at
least a few more of the world’s statesmen who realize that peace
will never come through treaties with liars—that it will come
only when we and the other “Christian” nations of the world begin
to heed our Creator’s insistent demand for prayer, penance and
absolute fidelity to His revealed law. leaving Khrushchev and his
cohorts to the Almighty Power of God.
Jtlow He Has Grown
(By F, J. Sheed)
Column 55
Infallibility
From what was said last
week, it emerges that either
there is a teacher now teaching
upon earth, guaranteed by
Christ as the apostles were—or
there is no possibility of our
knowing the
truth which
He saw to be
so e s s e n tial.
Already, well
before His
death, He had
given men au
thority to
teach with His
authority: it was to the disci
ples, not to the apostles only
that He said “He that hears
you, hears me.” That, extended
to the Church He founded that
it might teach to the end of
time, is His formula to ensure
that we shall receive His truth
with no admixture of error.
There is no other formula. The
name for this one is Infallibility.
Infallibility is concerned with
teaching only. It is no guarantee
of holiness. It simply means
that the Church can tell us, not
as its own best guess but with
certainty, the meaning of what
Christ taught.
This, in brief, is the way of it.
The successors of the apostles
are the bishops. What they are
agreed in teaching as the Reve
lation of Christ upon Faith and
Morals—that is, upon truths to
be believed and laws to be
obeyed—is infallible. God sees
to it that it contains no error.
The agreement referred to need
not be total, including every
bishop that has been or now is;
individual bishops, even groups
of bishops, in some time or
place, may teach error. But a
teaching given by the great
mass of the bishops of the
world—we may call it a moral
universalit y—is certainly
Christ’s.
This teaching by bishops is
(Continued on Page 5)
STi/olK
Jottings..
(By BARBARA C. JENCKS)
"I want the intellectual lay
man to be religious and the de
vout ecclesiastic to be intellec
tual.”
Cardinal Newman
Question
Box
JOSEPH BREIG
HOW MANY LITTLE ONES?
(By David Q. Liptak)
Q. Not too long ago a group
of Presbyterian ministers were
reported as opposed to a Cath
olic president on the alleged
grounds that Catholics believe
that the end justifies the means.
How could supposedly educated
men be so ignorant of a point
they could easily check out in
any standard library? And why
do some Protestants continue to
voice this allegation when they
know it couldn't possibly be
true?
A. How any sufficiently in-*
formed person could possibly
give serious credence to the fal
lacy that Catholics believe a
moral end can justify immoral
means is impossible to un
derstand unless bad faith
is presumed somewhere along
the line. For a Protestant
minister to voice such
a fallacy is especially ironic.
The truth of the matter is that
whereas this principle of justifi
cation is, always has been, and
will ever be, flatly condemned
by Catholic theology, it is none
theless espoused and propagated
by Protestant dogma in general,
so much so that it has become
characteristic of the Protestant
approach to several modern
moral problems.
CONTRACEPTIVE birth pre
vention is an obvious example.
Here, recourse to intrinsically
immoral means (the use of the
generative act in such a way
that its primary natural end is
deliberately frustrated) is arbi
trarily judicated moral because
of an end at least indifferent in
itself (family limitation).
SO-CALLED therapeutic abor
tion is another example. Here,
again, a thoroughly evil means
(the direct, deliberate taking of
a human life on one’s own au
thority—direct murder in other
words) is accepted as moral be
cause of a presumed moral end
(the alleged clinical welfare of
the mother, an excuse which
has been termed a fantastic fic
tion by competent physicians).
DIVORCE and remarriage is
a third instance of the end just
ifying the means in Protestant
dogma. Here the dissolution of
a valid marriage bond together
with the attempted marriage of
(Continued on Page 5)
Few people, it seems to me,
realize how beautifully right,
and how kind and considerate,
is the teaching of the Catholic
Church on birth control.
Not only is it spiritually sub
lime and mor
ally noble; it
is also down-
to-earth, emi
nently reason
able, and ten
derly aware
of the prob
lems of human
beings. ~
The trouble is that it”is sel-
dom fairly stated. It is half-
stated or mis-stated. That is
why I would like to restate it
here.
Pope John, the other day,
voiced on aspect of it when he
counselled parents not to be
afraid “of the number of your
sons and daughters.”
ON THE CONTRARY, he
said, husbands and wives should
ask God for children, and rear
them for the glory of their
earthly fatherlands and their
fatherland in Heaven.
That is inspiringly true; but
not for a moment would Pope
John want anybody to imagine
that in his chat with pilgrims,
he exhausted the subject.
No; his remarks were for peo
ple who are normally healthy
and strong, who can expect nor
mal children normally deliver
ed,and are able to rear them.
But does the Church care
nothing about couples who have
special problems? The Church
cares about them very much.
A FEW YEARS before his
death, Pope Pius XII delivered
an important address which has
not received nearly as much
study as it deserves.
He dealt with the difficulties
that arise in some marriages.
These can be problems of euge
nics, health, economics and the
like.
For instance, because of social
injustice, there are parents who
must limit the 1 number of chil
dren if they are to prepare them
adequately for life.
There are cases where preg
nancy is seriously dangerous
for the woman. And sometimes
a couple is unable to bring
forth a normal child.
POPE PIUS said that when
these problems are real, and not
fanciful, couples may use nat
ural means to avoid childbirth
either altogether, or for periods
of time.
Natural birth control has come
to be known by the odd word
“rhythm” because it is based on
the rhythm of the wife’s periods
of fertility and infertility.
By sacrificing physical ex
pression of their love for each
other at certain times, a hus
band and wife can limit con
ceptions, or even avoid con
ception entirely.
It is moral to do so for right
and sufficient reasons. And as
Pius XII noted, the area of suf
ficient reason is not oppressive
ly narrow, but quite broad.
THERE HAS BEEN one vexa
tious difficulty, however. It has
not been easy in every case to
know with precision the dates
of a wife’s infertile periods.
However, Dr. Joseph B. Doyle,
director of the Fertility and En-
doctrine Clinic at St. Elizabeth
Hospital in Boston, believes he
has solved that problem.
After 15 years of study, he
has developed a simple device
for detecting fertile and infertile
periods.
He did so primarily to help
wives who want children and
have had difficulty in conceiv
ing. His discovery, however,
will equally serve those who
for right reasons need help in
moral birth control.
THUS SCIENCE now makes
clear the rightness of the divine
ordinance. People who should
space conceptions, or even avoid
them entirely, will be able to do
so without moral or physical
damage, and without degrading
the sacred relationship which is
part of the sacrament of mar
riage.
Those who obey God and the
Church find in the long run,
that they have been serving
their own happiness also. And
those who disobey learn sooner
or later that they have pur
chased sorrow rather than joy.
God does not make command
ments to oppress us, but to set
us free.
• THE WIDESPREAD VO
CATION shortage today pre
sents a constant threat to Cath
olic education tomorrow. More
and more students will be
knocking at the doors of Cath
olic schools from kindergarten
through college. It is not enough
that vocations keep to the num
bers of the past but they must
increase in proportion to the
needs of this great giant of a
Catholic system of education
stretching and growing all over
the nation. Strangely enough it
is the vocations to the sister
hood wherein the shortage is
already felt. Religious are need
ed in greater numbers to staff
new parish schools with soaring
enrollments. As a result, there
is a new figure of important
appearing on the Catholic
American horizon and that is
the lay teacher in the parochial
elementary and secondary
grades. The lay teacher in high
er education is no stranger. The
lay teacher is a comparative
newcomer to the parish school
system, long staffed by the
dedicated Sister.
• "AVE MARIE," the nation
al weekly, in an issue back in
November, 1959, stated that lay
teachers are needed and will be
increasingly needed as time goes
by to maintain the parochial
school system. The magazine
went on to state that in the
long run the employment of lay
teachers in a parochial school
system would be a healthful
thing for Catholic education,
particularly in the area of in
tellectual life. They hasten to
add that “this in no way dis
parages the tremendous job be
ing done in education now and
in the past by those wonderful
teaching Sisters who give their
lives to the cause of Catholic
education.” Their argument fol
lows that in the past students in
parochial schools never had a
lay teacher; they had no per
sonal contact with the idea that
it was good and desirable for
a lay Catholic to aspire to the
teaching profession as a voca
tion. In other words, they had
no lay example to hold up as
their ideal. In brief, the writer
believed that the association
with more lay teachers—not in
place of, but in addition to reli
gious teachers—will help to
serve that end and will ulti
mately be of great benefit to
American Catholic intellectual
life.”
LIFE'S LIKE THAT
There is no justice—about the
time the bluebirds return the
spring taxes are due.
• MY PERSONAL IDEAS on
this subject were presented in
a column some time ago en
titled “Intellectuals in Black”
in which the role of the dedi
cated priest, nun and brother in
the classroom was cited an in
valuable and irreplaceable. A
group of my writing students
discussed this problem of short
age of vocations to the sister
hoods and also the influx of
lay teachers in parochial class
rooms. Some of their thoughts
are printed below.
Q. What would you attribute
to the lack of vocations amon ;
women?
A. The greater rewards of thi
priesthood in comparison. th<
priest offers the Sacrifice of th<
Mass. Lack of generosity, wronj
attitude of parents. More em
phasis on material values today
Increased education and in
Creased independence of women
Selfishness, nuns thought of a:
old-fashioned.
Q. When your child enter:
parochial school, will you be
disappointed if - she does noi
have a nun for a teacher?
A. Yes, this is the beginning
of the child’s religious training
The nun is better trained than
a lay teacher would be.
Yes, I believe that Sisters are
able to dedicate themselves
more absolutely to the teaching
of children and are able tc
transmit their very real love of
God to the younger ones. I want
my child to be under their good
example.
Yes, because in most cases
you are confident in the ability
of a religious to inculate a true
religious spirit and knowledge
in a child-even the atmosphere
of a class with a nun is mean
ingful and demanding of respect
and reverence.
No, providing her teacher was
a good Catholic with a good
education.
Q. How would you feel about
this in the higher grades and in
college, would you still want a
Sister or religious for a teacher
of your children?
A. Yes, in junior and senior
high schools because they need
the type of religious training,
but in college a lay teacher is
fine. In college they are less
susceptible to opinions than
they were in the formative
y ears - »m
In junior high, high and col
lege, I think a religious should
teach theology and courses con
nected closely to religious.
I would prefer them.
In junior high, I would like
my children to have Sisters. In
high school, I would want them
to have either lay or religious
depending on which has the
greater command of the subject
matter.
These students while not ap
parently wanting to dedicate
, their own lives to the cause of
Catholic education, were very
anxious that there be somebody
else on hand in a holy habit to
" instruct their children. In their
question as to the shortage of
vocations to the Sisterhood, one
obvious answer in lacking. True,
there are more opportunities for
women today and women are
, better educated, yet the crux of
the’ matter is this: Women to
day are failing to be women.
They have lost sight of the very
essence of their womanliness.
j (Woman was ever created to
sacrifice and to give to others.
In her rush after these new
opportunities and freedoms, she
has sold her birthright for
baubles. Yet above it all, we
V jfaee a very real problem in our
vochtion shortage. This problem
has many aspects and it is a
problem which should be dis
cussed whenever Catholics meet
■ and most of all, it is a problem
which needs much prayer.
'Population Explosion 7 Theory Challenged
BACKDROP
THE
Advocates of artificial birth
control who use the catch
phrase “population explosion”
to support their cause usually
talk as though demographers
were unanimous in the belief
that, unless
the growth in
population is
checked, the
time will come
when there
will be neither
room for it on
this earth nor
food to sustain
it.
The fact is, of course, that
there is no such unanimity.
Eminent students of the popula
tion problem challenge the two
main assumptions underlying
the “population explosion” the
ory. They do not agree that the
world’s population will continue
to expand indefinitely and they
question whether the time will
come when the earth’s surface
will be unable to nourish those
who live on it.
MORE FOOD—LESS LABOR
Stated in its simplest terms
the question raised by the ad
vocates of birth control runs,
“Where will the food come
from to feed an ever-expanding
world population, when millions
now go to bed hungry every
night?”
The solution, as the neo-
Mathusians envision it, is to re
duce the number of mouths to
feed by systematic birth control
until the population and the
food are brought into balance.
This way out of the dilemma
assumes that the world is now
producing near the maximum
amount of food it is possible to
By JOHN C. O’BRIEN
produce. But this is a conclusion
that many agriculturalists re
fuse to accept.
Agricultural production has
been brought to a higher degree
of efficiency, in the United
States than in any other large
country. On a constantly
shrinking acreage, the United
States has been producing more
and more food and fiber with
a constantly shrinking farm
labor force.
For example, between 1954
and 1958, there was a 30 per
cent rise in the annual wheat
yield per acre. In the last 18
years the amount of food and
fiber produced per man-hour of
farm work has doubled. And it
is now costing the United States
taxpayers $1,000,000,000 a year
to store government-held agri
cultural surpluses.
Yet, high as the yield of our
agriculture now is, still more
intensive cultivation has been
proved to be possible. In a care
fully supervised five-year ex
periment near Essen, Germany,
an engineer’s family of six lived
in excellent health on the prod
ucts of three acres, supple
mented only by salt, baking
powder, lime, mineral fertilizer
and peat.
On the basis of this experi
ment, Colin Clark, director of
the Oxford Agricultural and
Economics Research Institute,
has estimated that the 19,000,-
000,000, acres of “good, tem
perate agricultural land now
available” could produce enough
food to sustain a population of
38,000,000,000 without a single
improvement in existing agri
cultural techniques. This hypo
thetical population would be
more than three times the
world’s population if the present
figure were doubled twice.
MEAT AND FERTILITY
Clark’s estimate of potential
food production would seem to
take care of an expanding popu
lation for a long time to come.
But nutritionists and population
experts are by no means agreed
that birthrates will continue to
soar indefinitely.
Among those who challenge
this assumption is the Brazilian,
Dr. Josue de Castro, of the UN
Food and Agriculture Organiza
tion. He has advanced the the
ory, based upon a study of hu
man birthrates, and experiments
with albino rats at Stanford
University, that an adequate in
take of animal proteins tends
automatically to reduce fertility
in the human race.
He notes that the highest an
nual birthrates are in countries
with a low animal fat intake,
such as Formosa, India, and
Japan. On the other hand, in
countries where a great deal of
meat is j eaten—the United
States, Australia and Sweden—■
birth rates are low.
Even if it is conceded that
birth control is practiced in the
latter three countries, Castro
maintains that this could not
influence the birth rate suffici
ently to account altogether for
the wide disparity between the
fertility of the two groups of
countries. Furthermore, he
notes, that the decline in-fer
tility of albino rats, when fed
a high animal protein diet,
could not possibility be account
ed for, by birth control among
the rats.
View'
I from the
|j| Rectory
By The Rav. Robert H. Wharton
FINDERSKEEPERS?
The professor in class had
just concluded an experiment
concerning atoms. He comment
ed: “Please note that at the be
ginning of the experiment there
were 27 atoms; now there are
only 26. Stu
dents, what
happened to
that other
atom?”
There were
several mo
ments of tense
silence. Then
a low voice
from the rear
slowly, “Don’t
this room.”
All kidding aside, I think a
court would say that atoms be
long to anyone who finds them.
Not atoms made up into such
things as necklaces, horses or
wallets, of course. Only un
attached, homeless atoms.
Atoms (and molecules, too)
are about the only things not
claimed by someone on this
earth. Somehow air is still free
and untaxed. But just about
everything else might as well
have some owner’s name on it.
A national magazine even dis
cussed at length the question of
who owns your garbage after
you put it out. See?
Long ago some dishonest
rhyme-maker thought up that
little ditty “finders keepers,
losers weepers,” Not so. When
a person loses something he
may weep, but you have no
right to keep.
Whenever we find a lost ob
ject, we have an obligation to
try to find the owner. There’s
an obligation, that is, if there’s
some hope of discovering him.
Just because someone says
“That’s my dollar bill!” you
don’t have to turn it over. There
must be some way of proving
ownership, and this is rather
hard with money unless his
name is Ivy Baker Priest.
There’s an obligation of char
ity, in the first place, to take
care of lost objects. If you
should see a lost elephant wan
dering along the Avenue,
you have no right to shrug
your shoulders and say, “It’s
none of my business.” Some lit
tle kid probably would be cry
ing at that very moment for his
missing pet.
You’re absolved from your
obligation, however, if trying
to find the owner of the lost
object would prove very incon
venient. Maybe you have no
extra bed for the elephant in
your home.
But suppose you do take over
a lost object. Then you have the
obligation in justice, to seek the
owner. If you advertise, you
would be entitled to compensa
tion for your expenses. Should
you be keeping that lost ele
phant, for instance, you may de
mand payment for food, broken
furniture and a large hole in
the floor. If the owner refuses
to pay, then you may keep the
pachyderm. And good luck.
While we’re on the subject of
animals, it might be mentioned
that no one has a right to keep
lost dogs, cats or parakeets.
Homing pigeons should be sent
home, unless they have flown
away for good. Ditto with bees.
If they still call some particular
hive their home, they’re not
yours.
Tilings belonging to no one
may be kept by toe finder of
course. If you’re lucky enough to
find a pearl on the seashore or a
nugget of gold on the street,
don’t let anyone talk you out of
it. It’s yours.
What about books? Borrowed
books are always lost books, it
seems to me. There is an unwrit
ten law engraved on the human
heart that borrowed books
should never, never be returned.
Despite this perverse human in
clination, we retain ownership
of our own books no matter
how long they have gathered
dust on someone’s else’s shelf.
What we have said about books
also applies to rakes, lawn
mowers, cups of sugar, and Chi
nese back-s cratchers. Your
neighbor may have forgotten
about these items, but God
hasn’t.
One category of lost objects
is the unpaid bill. It might be
that the company has forgotten
to bill you for that seven-
volume set of “North American
Snakes.” No matter. It is still
theft to refrain from paying up.
It certainly would be a ques
tionable practice to run up bills
you know you can’t pay. Any
store or company is entitled to
payment within a reasonable
time. In this age of the credit-
card, we should keep a wary
eye on our bank accounts. The
other eye could be kept on the
collection agency, which is only
too happy to relieve you of the
article in question.
One last item for the thou
sands of troubled wives who
have begged us to supply an
answer. Is the little woman en
titled to keep the money she
finds in her husband’s pockets?
If mother needs money to
feed the scrawny, undernourish
ed kids—yes, finders keepers. If
dad is putting most of the in
come on a horse’s nose, go
ahead and take it, mom.
But what if mother just
wants a ten-spot for a new hat?
I plead the Fifth.
PRESBYTERIANS
REJECT STAND
ON CATHOLIC
JACKSONVILLE, Fla., (NC)
—The General Assembly of the
Southern Presbyterian Church
has rejected a resolution which
would have put the church on
record as opposing a Catholic
President.
The resolution was defeated
by an overwhelming voice vote
at the meeting. In its place, the
assembly adopted a recommen
dation of the church group’s
Standing Committee on Chris
tian Relations, which declared
that it is not appropriate for the
General Assembly to endorse
or condemn any candidate for
public office.
416 8TH ST., AUGUSTA, GA.
Published fortnightly by the Catholic Laymen’s Association of
Georgia, Inc., with the Approbation of the Most Reverend
Bishop of Savannah; and the Most Reverend Bishop of Atlanta.
Subscription price $3.00 per year.
Second class mail privileges authorized at Monroe, Georgia. Send
notice of change of address to P. O. Box 320, Monroe, Georgia.
REV. FRANCIS J. DONOHUE REV. R. DONALD KIERNAN
Editor Savannah Edition Editor Atlanta Edition
JOHN MARKWALTER
Managing Editor
v °1- 40 Saturday, May 14, 1960 No. 25
ASSOCIATION OFFICERS
GEORGE GINGELL, Columbus President
MRS. DAN HARRIS, Macon * Vice-President
TOM GRIFFIN, Atlanta Vice-President
NICK CAMERIO, Macon Secretary
JOHN T. BUCKLEY, Augusta Treasure-
ALVIN M. McAULIFFE, Augusta Auditor
JOHN MARKWALTER, Augusta Executive Secretary
MISS CF.CILE FERRY, Augusta Financial Secretary
anybody leave
'' t
*»