Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

PAGE 4—THE BULLETIN, July 9, 1960 JOSEPH BREIG Moscow Speaks — Reds Everywhere Obey Red on His Map? THE BACKDROP If ever there was any doubt that the communists everywhere are directed from Moscow, it should have been dispelled by the communist-inspired protest against President Eisenhower’s visit to Japan and the hostile demonstration against White House Press Secre tary James C. Hag- erty at Tokyo’s I n ternational Airport. No more convincing proof of Moscow’s domination of com munists in other countries could be cited than the speed and uni formity with which they have reacted to twists in Soviet pol icy—from the cold war to the “spirit of Camp David” and back again to the cold war after the U-2 incident and the col lapse of the summit conference. NIXON TOUR Throughout 1958, the cold war was in high gear. Communist publications and spokesmen throughout the world followed the Moscow line of denunciation of the United States as decadent, capitalist, imperialist and ag gressive. When Vice President Nixon made a tour of Latin America that year, communist-inspired mobs turned out to vilify him and his wife. But when Presi dent Eisenhower visited our southern neighbors in February of this year, after the switch to the “peaceful co-existence” line, scarcely a peep was heard from the South American commu nists. During his tour, Nixon visited six Latin American capitals. Everywhere he was heckled by communist-inspired demonstra- By JOHN C. O’BRIEN tors, and in Lima, Peru, and in Caracas, Venezuela, he narrow ly escaped bodily harm at the hands of hate-spewing radicals. In Lima, demonstrators threw stones and fruit at his automo bile. In Caracas, mobs cast stones and sticks and attempted to drag him from his car. The change in the Moscow line came during Nikita Khrush chev’s visit to the United States in September, 1959. It was then that the “peaceful co-existence” theme was trotted out. It was then that a summit meeting in Paris was scheduled for the fol lowing May and a visit to the Soviet Union by President Ei senhower in June. Suddenly the President was transformed from a tool of the “war-mongering” capitalists into a man of good will and peaceful intentions. Immediately, communist par ties all over the world took up the new refrain. Attacks upon the United States and the Presi dent ceased. And when Mr. Ei senhower embarked in Decem ber, 1959, on his 11-nation tour in the Mediterranean and the Middle East, orders went out to communist parties to refrain from hostile demonstrations. In Rome, the communists, who form one of the largest Red parties outside the Soviet Union and China, actually joined in the tremendous welcome for the President. Communist party leaders and spokesmen for the communist-led General Confed eration of Labor hailed the President as an ambassador of good will. Even the noisy com munists of Paris were on their good behavior and his welcome there went off without un toward incident. LIGHTNING CHANGE In India, where a vociferous ur nap ifff i from the \Jn 1 | \ Itectfory By The Rev. Robert H. Wharton «. SUCCOTASH & SORROW A very shy young man sat next to a glamorous debutante at a dinner party. In the middle of the main course he seized a bowl of succotash and poured it over the debutante’s chic coif fure. The young lady rose in- dignantly. “How dare you?” she blazed, pluck ing corn and peas out of her h a i r.“ “How dare you tnrow succutasn at me?” The young man blanched. “Good heavens,” he stammered. “Was that succotash? I thought it was spinach!” It’s beyond me how the young man could mistake succotash for spinach. But this incident— a true story, of course—just goes to show that we all make mistakes. If you read the newspapers carefully, you can catch some hilarious typographical boners. This item is my favorite: “Among the first to enter the airplane was Mrs. Clara Adams of Tannersville, Pa., lone wom an passenger. Slowly her nose was turned around to face in a southwesterly direction. Then, like some strange beast, she crawled along the grass.” Poor Mrs. Adams of Tanners ville. But this one of many bon ers again demonstrates our hu man propensity for error. If we did not make mistakes so / often, life would be quite different. There would be no jpeed for erasers on pencils. Ac cident insurance companies would go out of business. Pris ons could be closed, or rather opened up. If we could make no mistakes, however, the most important thing is that priests could go off to a ball game on Saturday afternoon. There would be no Sacrament of Penance, because there would be no sins to be forgiven. This is all idle dreaming, of course, because the world is full of errors, blunders, oversights, and misprints. Otherwise I Would not have ascended the pulpit, one bright and glorious Christmas morning, to wish all the parishioners “a very holy and happy Easter.” We can’t wish away sin, either. Adam fell, and when he came tumbling down he dragged us with him. Not that We blame our greatest-grand father entirely. The only way we can be guilty of sin is to freely and deliberately choose to commit it. And if we have been unfortu nate enough to fall into sin, the only way we can get back into God’s friendship is by contrition. There is no one who can say he is not guilty of some sin; therefore, contrition is one of the most important elements in our life. Contrition comes from a Latin word meaning to grind or break up. Our sorrow for sin is sup posed to grind our hearts at the thought of our offense. But this shouldn’t lead us to believe that sorrow can be merely emotional. It must be truly internal. It makes no difference how many buckets of tears you shed if your sorrow is not truly in terior. In fact, you might have a most sincere contrition and still be unable to feel any re gret. More important than the tears is the intellectual realiza tion of your fault and of the goodness of the One offended. True sorrow also extends to all mortal sins. You can’t re gret killing Tom and Dick while rejoicing over your murder of Harry. We can be sorry for one venial sin and be forgiven, even while we have no sorrow for other venial sins. But with mor tal sins, it’s all or nothing. Certified contrition must be based on a supernatural motive as well. Uncle Carbuncle might be very sorry his drunkenness has caused him to make a fool of himself. But that’s not the sin-forgiving sorrow he needs. Our sins may ruin our health, lead us into disgrace or cause us to lose money. But we must be sorry because we have offended God in order to be forgiven. When we regret our sin be cause we can feel the flames of hell licking at our heels, that contrition is imperfect. It’s enough for forgiveness when we receive the absolution of the priest. But the more perfect was is the way of perfect contrition. If we’re sorry for our sins be cause we have offended our good God, then the contrition is perfect. Whenever we have this top-notch sorrow our sins are washed away even before we hear the absolving words of the priest. This is the kind of sor row we should strive for, of course, because—well, because it’s perfect, more worthy of God. The real test of contrition, when you get down to it, is the purpose of amendment. Perhaps communist minority had often made trouble for its own gov ernment, the President received what was described as the great est and warmest welcome ever given a foreigner. The Indian communists were docilely obe dient to their Kremlin masters. Again, in February of this year, the President made a four- teen-day tour of South America, visiting Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Uraguay. Communists are strong in all these countries, particularly in Brazil and Ura guay. But the President re ceived warm receptions, marred only by a few student groups here and there bearing anti imperialism signs. Half a mil lion cheering Brazilians turned out in Rio de Janeiro and in San Paulo. During a three-mile motorcade through Montevideo, no communist demonstrations occurred. At that time, of course, Khru. shchev still wanted to have the summit meeting and he was pre paring a tremendous welcome for the President in Moscow. The instructions then were that communists were not under any circumstances to embarrass the American President. But after the U-2 incident and the collapse of the summit, Khrushchev did an abrupt about-face. The new policy be came one of concerted effort to humiliate the President on every occasion and destroy the image of a man of peace which Khru shchev himself had helped to build up. And with lightning speed, the Japanese communists set to work to organize Japanese radicals and pacificists in a violent protest against the President’s scheduled visit to Japan. the tears won’t come, maybe you feel some affection for the sin you’re trying to avoid—but if you sincerely intend to avoid the sin because you realize it offends God, you’re sorry. God’s forgiveness of sin is really a wonderful thing, some thing we usually fail to appre ciate because it’s so easy to get. But it’s worthwhile to stir up our faith and realize its value. And to realize the value of the key to forgiveness—contrition. If you make the mistake of pouring succotash over a young lady’s head, you can always pick the peas and corn out of her hair. But if you have the misfortune of falling into sin, there’s no way to make up for it except by a truly sincere and supernatural sorrow. Question Box (By David Q, Liplak) Q. If the Bible appeared for the very first time today, do you think that any publisher would accept it? I just heard a radio commentator express the opinion that no publisher today would dare print the Bible if it were a modern book, be cause he would thereby alienate every religious body in the world. There wouldn't be a sin gle religion or sect, he implied, which wouldn't attack it on one point or another. Taking this opinion as an hypothesis pure and simple, doesn't it merit some serious condition? A. That God might have wait ed until 1960 before giving the Bible to men is a preposterous supposition in itself. Under such an hypothesis, the last twenty centuries would hav? been de prived of one of the two princi pal fonts of the revealed truths necessary and helpful for spirit ual perfection! and salvation. Nonetheless, there is nothing objectionable about considering this supposition as sheer con jecture, in a purely theoretical “What if—,” context. IN THIS latter sense, if the Bible appeared for'the very first time now, in the year 1960, it surely would occasion open at tack on the part of millions. The whole of the New Testa ment alone, for example, would be summarily dismissed as so much fiction by those who re fuse to believe that Christ is God, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity Incarnate. FROM THE DOCTRINAL viewpoint, specifically, scores of modern-day non -Catholics would undoubtedly take offense because the Bible teaches 1) that Christ really and truly rose Continued on Page 5) SHARING OUR TREASURE "A Pamphlet Changed My Life," Declares Convert By REV. JOHN A. O'BRIEN, Ph. D. r , , , ,, , , , , (University of Noire Dame) r Have you ever given a pam phlet to a non-Catholic friend? If not, you are failing to use a simple and effective method of kindling a person’s interest in the Faith and of leading him into the fold. Costing but a trifle, a pam- l j v e n i ently in ||| one’s pocket ||| or purse. Yet j it has often served as the | spark which started a person on his way into the Church. This is illustrated in the conversion of Gordon D. Gillette of Belle vue, Washington. “I was raised as an Episcopal ian,” related Gordon, “but oc casionally went to other Church es and Sunday Schools. I at tended a private high school and during my junior year I listened to the speakers at a symposium on religion. One, a chemist at a prominent uni versity, defined God as simply the sum of all the forces in the universe. His talk impressed me and I was led to believe that religion was not really essential. “I failed to realize that train ing in chemistry doesn’t qualify one' to speak with authority on religion. My attitude toward the Catholic Church was one of in difference until, in college, the bad example of a few Catholics turned me strongly against it. I concluded that as long as Catholics paid their ‘confessional fees’ they could live as they pleased and still be forgiven. “After graduating in aero nautical engineering in 1949, I came to work for the Boeing Airplane Company in Seattle. In a rooming house I met a Mor mon who was taking Catholic instructions. One Saturday night we had a long discussion, and he loaned me a pamphlet on the Catholic religion. That pam* phlet changed the whole course of my life. “I stayed up until three o’ clock reading and studying it. It made me realize how wrong were my ideas about the Cath olic Faith. My friend invited me to attend with him an Inquiry Class at Blessed Sacrament Church, conducted by Father William Norton, O.P. I had al ways thought of religion as solely a matter of emotion, and for the first time I realized that it has a rational basis. “Father’s lectures demon strated the existence of a per sonal God, the divinity of Christ as manifested by His testimony and miracles, particularly the Resurrection, and the divine foundation of the Church and her authority to teach all na tions, as shown in the Gospels. I supplemented the lectures by reading Sheehan’s Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine and thus ' got a thorough grasp of the ra tional bases of; religious belief and of the Church’s teachings. “I was baptized by Father Norton and received our Eucha- istic Lord in Holy Communion in August 1950. My heart was filled with love and rapture. I married a Catholic and we’ve been blessed with two children. I helped to interest my mother in the Faith and now she too is a devout Catholic. Though I’ve lived in two archdiocese and six parishes, I’ve rarely heard any mention from the pulpit about the need and obligation of the laity to try to share the Faith. “I believe that is why so few Catholics made any effort in this matter. That’s why there is but one convert for every 270 Catholics as contrasted with one convert for every nine Witnesses of Jehovah. “Though possessing the reli gion founded by Christ for the salvation of all, we Catholics are least active in seeking to share it. If every Catholic pass ed on a pamphlet each month, explained his religion, interested a friend and brought him to an Inquiry Class we could, with God’s help, win millions of con verts each year.” Ms End To Ban On Bible Reading In Public Schools PHILADELPHIA (NC) — An aiiorney for the school district of nearby Abington, Pa., has called on a special Federal court to lift an injunction against Bible reading in public schools there. C. Brewster Rhoads told the three-judge court that the in junction against Bible reading, which it imposed last Septem ber, can now be lifted because action by the State Legislature has removed the controversial aspects of the practice. The court imposed its ban on Bible reading last September at the request of Mr. and Mrs. Ed ward L. Schempp, a Unitarian couple who charged that the practice violated constitutional guarantees of free exercise of religion. In December, the State Legis lature adopted a low providing that children may be excused from attendance at the Bible reading sessions if their parents object. In view of this action by the State Legislature, Mr. Rhoads argued, it would now be appro priate for the court to lift its injunction. However, Henry W. Sawyer, an attorney for the Schempps, opposed lifting the ban. Mr. Sawyer pointed out that, following the September ruling by the Federal Court here, the Abington school district filed notice of appeal to the U.S. Su preme Court. He said this meant the case is no, longer in the hands of the Federal Court, but must be decided now by the Supreme Court. Mr. and Mrs. Schempp are siill opposing Bible reading in Abington public schools, even on the optional-attendance basis approved by the State Legisla ture. They contend that reading the Bible in public schools under any conditions constitutes "dis seminating the religious mes sage of Christianity." Tax Faith To Death Theology For The Layman (By F. J. Sheed) Column 60 The Gifts Of The Holy Ghost Actual Graces, we have noted, do not cease when the soul re ceives Sanctifying Grace. On the contrary they become more frequent, richer, more various. For as their name implies they are given us for action, and a whole new world of action is now ours. This brings us most particularly to the Gifts of the Holy Ghost. We receive these, as we receive the Seven Virtues, with Sanctifying Grace: they are abiding qualities in the graced soul. The most elemen tary statement of their function is that they enable us to catch the wind of Actual Grace when it blows, so that we respond to it, move with it. Of all the myriad ways in which the Holy Ghost can move the souls of men to fruitful action, there are these seven ways, of such im portance that the soul is given special gifts to respond to His guidance and impulse. It is from Isaias (XI.2) that we get the names of the Seven Gifts: “The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him: the Spirit of Wisdom, and of Understand ing, the Spirit of Counsel and of Fortitude, the Spirit of Knowledge and of Piety. And he shall be filled with the Spirit of the Fear of the Lord. He shall not judge according to the sight of the eyes, nor approve accord ing to the hearing of the ears.” Observe that the “he” and “him” of whom Isaias is speak ing is the Messiah to come, so that in receiving these gifts also we are receiving Christ’s life. Each of them is worth long and detailed study. Here we can merely indicate what they are for. We have seen that by the Theological Virtue of Faith we accept whatever God has reveal ed for no other reason than that He has revealed it; His Church gives the truths to us and in a sense they are now ours; but they are not fully ours until we grasp what they actually mean, pierce through the words to the reality they are meant to ex press, go ever deeper in their exploration. The Holy Ghost is offering us His aid, without which we could take no step, and by the Gift of Understand ing we respond to His aid. We may think of Understanding as giving eyes to Faith. Two other Gifts are there for the perfecting of what Faith has already given to our intellect. By Knowledge, we can develop a judgement of situations as created spiritual realities bear upon them and illumine them, we come to see everything in the context of the soul, grace, the sacraments, the next life. By Wisdom we judge more pro foundly still; as we respond to it we are reaching a kind of judgement of which it is not merely fantastic to say that we are beginning to see things as God Himself sees them. Still within the realm of see ing and judging—but always with a view to action—comes the Gift of Counsel. By it we are enabled to respond to the special guidance offered us by the Holy Ghost in the actual living of our life, our spiritual life especially—the things we must do and the things we must avoid here and now for our soul’s eternal good. In a way Counsel bears something of the same relation to the Moral Vir tue of Prudence that Under standing bears to the Theologi cal Virtue of Faith. There remain Piety, Fortitude and Fear of the Lord. As Coun sel gives a kind of special edge to the Moral Virtue of Prudence, these last three bear roughly the same relation to the other Moral Virtues. Piety is related to Justice in one rather special way. By Jus tice, we do our duty to God. We may define . Piety as love of one to whom we are already bound by the duty of obedience, so that by it we are doing our duty to God not simply because we owe it, probably without even reminding ourselves that we owe it, but because we love God. Indeed in this Piety is the most evident example of some thing that belongs to all the Gifts, for they all make love the main element in the action of the Virtue. Fortitude is related, naturally, to the Moral Virtue of the same name; Fear of the Lord is seen by theologians in special rela tion to the Moral Virtue of Temperance, but also to the There is a right and good meaning, an eminently Ameri can meaning, in “separation of church and state.” There is also a bad meaning, that ultimately serves the cause of anti-r e 1 i- gion, of athe ism. It is no ac- c i d e n t that the phrase is a pet : expres sion of com munists, and is used by them to justify oppression ligion in any form. In the true and American sense, “separation of church and state” means that government power may not be used to favor one church over others. It means also that no church is permitted to use government for its sectarian purposes to gain preference over other churches. In the wrong sense, “separa tion” means that the power of government is employed to dis courage religion, and to dis criminate against religious citi zens. IT IS NOW high time, it seems to me, for all Americans to begin to make the distinction between the right kind, and the wrong kind, of “separation of church and state.” We have a patriotic duty to see through the sloganeering of persons who use the phrase as a cloak for working against one particular religion, and in the long run against the whole re ligious heritage of the American people. For more than 10 years, there has been a barrage of propa ganda in this country which has blinded many Americans to this necessary distinction. That propaganda I hold, has been seriously harmful to our country and promises to grow ever more harmful. Protestants, Jews and Catho lics ought to be working as al lies to preserve and strengthen religion among the American people. Instead, understanding and cooperation have been terribly damaged by the use of “separa tion” as a device for harassing Catholics and hurting religion. “O Lord, behold the love in the heart of your beloved Son, which no tongue can describe.” Mass of the Sacred Heart • TALK OF LOVE is every where. Practice of love is sel dom. Every human heart knows love and needs love. Love is perhaps the most misused word in the human vodabulary. Every one talks about it, singers wail about it, but only a few know what it means. To find the true definition of love as it was in tended, we must look to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The heart is symbol of love. The human heart of Jesus stands for love both human and divine. All legitimate loves must be lighted from this spark. Diplomats meet and discuss, armies are trained, and atomic devices invented and perfected. All these methods are nothing without love. Love is what is needed to bring peace and goodwill among nations of Theological Virtue of Hope. We shall say a little more about these two Gifts next issue. I CONTEND THAT both America and religion are hurt when “separation” is distorted into an iron dogma which bars a pupil in a religious school from, so much as a ride in a school bus or a health examina tion at public expense. That kind of thinking, carried to its logical extreme, would de prive religious school children of the protection of policemen in crossing streets. I do not see ho.w a fairminded person can fail to see that the denial of bus rides and health examinations is in the same category as the denial of police and fire protection. NOW THE QUESTION has come to head in the matter of federal aid to education. Many Protestants and Jews will be unable to see the point of view I urge—and the reason is that they send their children to public schools. But unless they are very short-sighted, they should be able to conceive the possibility that the time may come when they will want their children in religious schools too. Indeed, they ought to be able to understand the position of Catholics without themselves feeling the financial pinch. Elementary fair play and equal justice before the law are violated by the idea of federal aid which excludes millions of American youngsters. ELEMENTARY CONCERN for the future of religion, too, should cause Protestants and Jews to ask themselves whether they really want the federal government’s taxing power used to discriminate against the re ligious education of children. I am not at all sure that I favor federal aid at all. I know that I am opposed to it unless it is really indispensable—which I doubt. If state and local gov ernments cannot do the edu cating job under the present tax setup, the wiser thing would be to insist that the federal govern ment relinquish some tax sources to local and state governments. Certainly it will be tragic for America if federal aid becomes an engine of taxation moving toward the crushing of religious education—and ultimately of religion. the world, among races and re ligions and families and work ers. How can we have world peace when there is so little knowledge of love born of the Sacred Heart of Jesus? * * * © ASK FOR A definition of love from a child of our age. His definition is sure to be limited to feeling, desire, pleasure. It would perhaps involve two peo ple or it might extend to an ob ject such as love for pizza or ice cream. We use one of the most sacred words with such reckless and thoughtless.(abandon. Love in its true definition is com pletely selfless. It knows no boundariesr-It has no limits. It is not lust,! possessiveness, gain, satisfaction, security, sensation, sense attraction, a well formed body, an attractive hairdo, a pressure of the hand. Look to the “Imitation of Christ” for a definition of love: “Love is swift*, sincere, pious, pleasant; strong, patient, faithful, prudent, long suffering, courageous and never seeks itself. Love is cir- Continued on Page 5) Sty* Huiblttt 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 MARKW ALTER Managing Editor Vol. 41 Saturday, July 9, 1960 No. 3 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 Treasurer ALVIN M. McAULIFFE, Augusta Auditor JOHN MARKW ALTER, Augusta Executive Secretary MISS CECILE FERRY, Augusta Financial Secretary Jottings... (By BARBARA C. JENCKS)