Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 4—THE BULLETIN, October 29, 19G0
IM GOD WE imPST
Sometime ago a prominent Catholic
magazine published an article maintaining
that espionage activities on the part of the
United States against Soviet Russia are
fully justified in the face of the vast Red
spy network, which some experts believe
includes more than sixty percent of all
Soviet personnel in the United States. Then
the article closed with the observation that,
while we are justified in relying on espion
age to help us counter Communist moves,
we might be well advised to place a great
deal more faith in the official U. S. motto,
“In God We Trust.”
It would seem that Trust in God is
also the only answer to the growing cam
paign of religious bigotry connected with
the coming Presidential election. Reason,
example, and all the efforts of fair-minded
men to stem a shameful • and rising tide
seem to have failed.
For many months, Catholic papers and
periodicals have been recounting the. con
stant practice of the Catholic Church in
America, with regard to religious liberty,
and publishing the unequivocal statements
of the American Catholic Hierarchy, given
over two centuries, upholding complete re
ligious freedom for all Americans. The
Catholic clergy have scrupulously avoided
any action or statement which might be
interpreted as an attempt to direct Cath
olics to vote for or against either party or
candidate.
But, far from ameliorating a campaign
attacking the intellectual honesty, integrity
and patriotism of 40,000,000 Americans of
the Catholic Faith, the statements of the
Catholic Press and the example of the
Catholic Church throughout the nation
seems only to have spurred the bigots on to
renewed and more violent attacks.
Catholics all over the country have
been urged to avoid fighting bigotry with
bigotry, antagonism with antagonism, and
to act instead as Christ, Himself acted,
when unjustly accused.
When Christ was accused of having a
devil, he denied it and showed why such
an accusation was false. Men of good will
listened to his reason. Others did not, and
when they again accused him falsely be
fore Pilate He held His peace, and prayed
for them from the Cross, “Father, forgive
them.”
We have shown by word and example
that the charges brought against us are not
true. Men of good-will have listened to us
and believed our words, accepting our
example as proof. We hope these men are
in the majority.
But the facts are clear. There are oth
ers, all too many of them, whose minds are
filled with ancient antagonisms and un
enlightened bv Christ-like Charity. We
must leave them to the workings of Divine
Grace, placing our faith, not in the power of
reasonable persuasion and the testimony of
200 years of American History, but in our
National motto, “In God We Trust.”
SEMANTIC CONFUSION IN U.N.
THE BACKDROP
One of the difficulties con
fronting the statesmen as
sembled in the United Nations
General Assembly is the se
mantic confusion about the
meaning of words in general
curr e n e c y.
Ordinary
terms, such
as “neutral,”
seem to
mean one
thing in the
West, anoth
er thing in
other parts
of the world.
The five heads of state who
introduced the resolution call
ing for a meeting between
President Eisenhower and Ni
kita Khrushchev refer to
themselves as the “neutralist”
bloc.
In the sense that “neutral
ist” is understood bv President
Eisenhower. British Prime
Minister Harold MacMillan
and otbpr western statesmen, a
“neutralist” bloc would be a
groun who side with neither
the West nor the East in the
cold war disnute.
PLAY KHRTTBHCHEV'S
GAME
But the question arises by
what titles can Indian Prime
Minister Nehru, Ghana Pres
ident Nkrumah, Carnal Abdel
Nasser, president of the Unit
ed Arab Republic; President
Tito, of Yugoslavia and Presi
dent Sukarno, of Indonesia lay
claim to the designation “neu
tralist.”
Even if we assume that the
five statesmen were sincere in
their belief that another meet
ing between Khrushchev and
Mr. Eisenhower is imperative
—a questionable assumption
in the case of all but Nehru—
they were, in fact, playing
By JOHN C. O’BRIEN
Khrushchev’s game in calling
for one.
The Soviet leader came to
the United States with two
ends in view: one, to embar
rass the President by suggest
ing another meeting on his
terms — an apology for the
U-2 incident — the other, dis
ruption of the United Nations.
Khrushchev knew the Pres
ident would not agree to a
meeting on such terms and
that Mr. Eisenhower could
turn a deaf ear to his sugges
tion without embarrassment.
Embarrassment would come
only if the proposal came from
outside the communist orbit.
And Khrushchev had no dif
ficulty finding so-called “neu
tral” statesmen to serve his
aims.
How neutral, however, are
the signatories to the resolu
tion demanding the Khrush-
chev-Eisenhower meeting?
In his tirade before the Gen
eral Assembly, Khrushchev
made certain demands, all in
tended to destroy, as Secretary
of State Herter noted, the
United Nations:
1) Removal of Secretary-
General Dag Hammarskjold.
2) Abolition of the Secreta
riat and substitution of a
three-member presidium, rep
resenting the West, the East
and Africa and Asia.
3) Removal of the UN from
the United States.
4) Sunport of communist
leaning Patrice Lumumba in
the Congo.
5) Admission of Red China
into the UN.
All of these demands were
opposed by the United States
and most of them by its allies
in the West. But in the main,
the five “neutralist” statesmen
proclaimed support of the
communist line.
SUPPORT LUMUMBA
Nehru refused to go along
with the condemnation of
Hammarskjold, reorganization
of the Secretariat and removal
of the UN from the United
States. But he favored admis
sion of Red China to the UN,
and supported the claims of
the Lumumba government.
Nasser also withheld sup
port for the reorganization of
the UN, although he was crit
ical of Hammarskjold. But he
too called for admission of Red
China and backed the Lu
mumba claims in the Congo.
Kwame Nkrumah, head of
the Ghana government, almost
went whole hog for the Khru
shchev program. He balked at
abolition of the UN secretariat
but suggested the creation of
three deputies, each repre
senting one of three blocs into
which the world is divided.
He backed, however, the de
mand for admission of China
and the Lumumba govern
ment. In fact he has been ac
cused by the President of the
Congo of offering in writing
to help Lumumba establish
himself in power with the aid
of Ghana troops serving under
the UN. If the letters are not
genuine, Nkrumah did not un
dertake to question their gen
uineness.
Indonesian President Sukar
no went all the way with the
Soviet premier, for reorganiza
tion of the UN and for uphold
ing the Lumumba claims.
Marshal Tito, the other
member of the quintet, insti
gated the proposal for a
Khrushchev-Eisenhower meet
ing and called for UN support
of the Congo’s communist-
oriented claimant to the pre
miership.
JOTTINGS
HE IS THE BOY"
By BARBARA C. JENCKS
“You arc all beautiful, O
Mary, you are the glory, you
are the joy, you are the honor
of our people.”
* * * *
every oc-
lltt^young
« THERE is such vastness
to our Marian treasury! What
would we do without Our.
Lady to call upon under a
litany of titles M
casion and need-
child calls
upon i ts
mother in
sorrows,
sick ness,
joys and sun-
shine. We
are never
without a
Mother whatever we do, what
ever we become, wherever we
go. We all have our favorite
titles for Our Lady and our
favorite Marian feasts and de
votions. One of my favorite
titles of Our Lady is “Star of
the sea.” We have our favorite
modonnas and our favorite
stories. In this month of
Our Lady, I would share
a very special story with
readers written by G. K.
Chesterton with an Irish
setting. Of course, the devo
tion of the Irish to the Mother
of the God and to the rosary
is proverbial. The Irish speak
of Our Lady as if she were
their next door neighbor.
There is that familiar close
ness without any lack of rev
erence. Read then this story
from the vast Marian treasure
and see if you aren’t moved
by it, too. It is called “He is
the Boy.”
• "I HEARD this story in
Donegal twelve years ago; but
I know nothing of the origin
of the story. It told how some
one had met in the rocky
wastes a beautiful peasant
woman carrying a child, who,
on being asked for her name
answered simply: “I am the
Mother of God, and this is
Himself, and He is the boy
you will all be wanting at the
last.” I had never forgotten
this phrase, which expresses
the spirit of which I speak in
a language which is a natural
literatures; and I remember it
suddenly long afterwards,
when I fancied I had found
something that expressed it
also, not in literature but in
sculpture. “I was looking
about for an image of Our
Lady which I wished to give
to the new church in our
neighborhood, and I was
shown a variety of very beau
tiful and often costly exam
ples in one of the most famous
and fashionable Catholic shops
in London. It is the glory of
the great cult of Mary that
she has appeared to painters
and sculptors under a variety
of bodily types almost wider
than the actual variety of all
the women in the world. She
has been the patroness of so
many lands and cities that she
has become the center of ev
ery scheme of ornament or
school of architecture; and her
garments have been made of
all the materials of the world.
Here there was everything,
from what some would call
the conventional dolls of the
Repository to what somfj
would call .the harshest cari
catures of the Primitives. But
somehow I felt fastidious, for
the first time in my life; and
felt that one kind was too con
ventional to be sincere and
the other too primitive to be
popular. But for some reason,
all the types shown to me left
me not indeed cold but vague,
and I ended prosaically by
following the proprietor to an
upper floor, on some matter of
mere business. “T h e upper
room was a sort of lumber
room, full of packages and
things partially unpacked, and
it seemed suddenly that She
was sanding there, amid
planks and shavings and saw
dust, as She stood in the car
penter’s shop in Nazareth. I
said something, and the pro
prietor answered rather cas
ually: “Oh, that’s only just
been unpacked; I’ve hardly
looked at it. It’s from Ireland!
• THE COLORS were tra
ditional; but the colors were
not conventional; a wave of
(Continued on Page 5)
Sam >
%ojf-
You Look Poorly,
JOSEPH BREIG
What School Is For
I am completely confident
that there is no nation or re
gion on earth where the peo
ple wish education to be eith
er actively or passively antag
onistic or indifferent to reli
gion.
The great
popular de
sire is ex-
pressedin
Americ a’s
North west
Ordinance —
schools
should for
ever be en-
couraged,
because religion and morality
are necessary for good gov
ernment.
Every scientific poll ever
conducted testifies to what
history and experience tell us:
that human beings in the
overwhelming plurality be
lieve in God.
They want their children to
believe, too. Emphatically so.
Indeed, they want their young
sters to be religiously and
morally wiser and better than
they are.
Surveys have repeatedly
shown that even persons who
proclaim themselves commu
nists, in many cases, send their
sons and daughters to church
and to religious instructions.
FROM THE DAWN of re
corded time, the atheist has
always been an oddity — so
much so that folks generally
take his godlessness with a
liberal dose of salt.
This skepticism about the
atheist’s atheism is the result
cf a sound instinct. The athe
ism of a great many self-
styled atheists is at deepest
only skin deep.
It is common enough to dis
cover, while talking with an
atheist, that what he declines
to believe in is not God at all,
but a ridiculous caricature of
God in his own mind.
In other cases, the atheist
does not disbelieve; he is
merely revolting against the
failure of many believers to
live up to the nobility which
belief in God entails.
For example, I think that
many of the Russian maxists
did not know enough about
God to reject Him. They sim-
oly rebelled against social in
justices permitted by lip-
believers.
BE THAT AS IT MAY, I
am sure that people every
where would vote in the vast
majority that youth shouli be
literate in religion as well as
in the other Rs of the edu
cated person.
I feel that we who are reli
gious, whether Jew, Protes
tant, Catholic, Moslem or
whatever, have been distract
ed and . tricked by outcries
about “separation of church
and state.”
I think we ought to get
back to the central problem
of our time, which is that of
seeing to it that coming gen
erations are not left in ignor
ance about religion and mor
ality.
Young people taught, train
ed and oriented in theology
and ethics would be proof
against the demagogs who
have ravished our civilization
— the Hitlers and their kind.
Emphatically, religion and
morality are necessary for
good government; and the
world today is in truly terrible
need of that.
In this series of articles,
therefore, I have urged that
we put aside hairsplittings and
sterile disputings about com
parative trivialities, and look
to mankind’s tomorrows.
I have made two chief pro
posals:
Some way must be found to
allow public schools to serve
religious parents and religious
children, without infringement
on the conscience of anyone.
The harassment of religious
schools — calling them “divi
sive” and “undemocratic” and
all that sort of thing — ought
to give way to friendliness to
ward them.
I do not know how public
schools can cooperate in help
ing parents to see that their
children learn religion along
with the other requisites of
the cultured person.
All I say is this: there must
he some way in which this
can be accomplished, and the
wav can he found if our best
minds address themselves
with good will to the problem.
Neither do I know precisely
how the unequal financial
burdens of parents with chil
dren in religious schools can
be eased to a reasonable ex
tent.
I merely hold that it can be
done, and ought to be done,
and will be done if America
ingenuity and fair play are
allowed to operate without
the heckling of small minds.
With this, I close my series
on education and religion.
Washington Letter
By J. J. Gilbert
WASHINGTON — The vis
it of Nikita Khrushchev to the
United Nations may have
dealt a blow to diplomacy as
the world has known it for
three centuries.
This is not because of
Khrushchev’s antics in the us
ually staid UN. It is because
he wants to substitute sum
mit meetings for so-called
quiet diplomacy, and may
have moved a step nearer his
goal.
Many have wondered why
Khrushchev ever came to the
UN. What could he have hop
ed to achieve by this maneu
ver? He suffered some revers
es in the U. N. General As
sembly balloting, but few will
want to dismiss his trip as a
waste of time.
It is altogether possible that
a principal objective of his
coming was to frighten the
West into another summit
meeting. The UN offered him
a large stage and big hack-
drop for his effort. He dra
matically threw down th<*
gauntlet on this issue. He tqld
the West: Have another sum
mit meeting soon after the
U. S, elections, or take the
consequences in the Berlin
crisis. This certainly sounded
like a threat.
Khrushchev has been trying
to convince people that ^sum
mit meetings are the thing.
He claims that leaders of big
powers coming together can
quickly settle big issues. Old
style diplomacy, where am
bassadors or foreign ministers
met beforehand in seclusion
and settled precisely what the
heads of state would agree to
later at a publicized meeting,
he calls a waste of time.
Diplomacy as we know it to
day goes back to the 17th cen
tury. It calls for trained career
diplomats, highly skilled and
long experienced, to meet
quietly and prepare the way
for their leaders. The diplo
mats overcome difficulties,
iron out problems, draw up
points of agreement. Then
when the chiefs of state meet
to formalize such agreements
all goes smoothly. If the am
bassadors fail to reach an
agreement, there will be no
meeting of the chiefs of state.
If they should reach an agree
ment, only to have a chief of
state upset the apple cart at
the publicized meeting, the
world would know whom to
blame.
A principal concern in all
this is to prevent embarrass
ment — to nations and to
their leaders.
Summit meetings, on the
other hand, seemed planned
by the Reds as an occasion to
embarrass the West. The com
munists use such meetings as
sounding boards for propa
ganda and, as in the case of
the Paris meeting, an occasion
to insult and humiliate the
head of another state. They
have not achieved what Khru
shchev says they will achieve.
Nothing is agreed upon in ad
vance; nothing is agreed upon
at the meetings.
But, with some of the so-
called neutral nations pressing
for a meeting of Eisenhower,
and Khrushchev, and with
Khrushchev having made such
a threatening demand for an
other summit meeting, it is to
be expected that there will be
unremitting pressure on the
United States to take part in
another such gathering.
It would not take too many
summit meetings for career
diplomats to become rusty in
their trade, and for the world
to come to look upon “sum
mitry” as the diplomacy of
our day.
TIP TO MOTORISTS
Bear in mind that jumping
traffic lights and easing by
stop signs are both had habits
—habits that are potentially
dangerous.
SLOW DOWN
Be cautious at school cross
ings — give our children their
right-of-way to a long life.
Tho Rev. Raises'.' 53. Whnrlon
It was the day before First
Friday and the children were
waiting in long lines at the
confessionals. As he neared
the box, Elwood began to fid
get and grow restless. His pal
n o t i c e d it.
“W h a t ’s
wrong, El
wood?”
“I’m scared
to death,
Herman. I’m
next and 1
don’t have
anything to
say. Lend
me some of
pay you back next week.
Neither a borrower nor a
lender be, Elwood. Especially
of sins.
It would be something if we
could borrow and lend sins.
It would be good to unload
them on someone else — and
if the sins are like every other
loaned object, they probably
would never be returned. The
disadvantage would be that
only someone like Elwood
would want to borrow them.
Our Savior Himself, thank
heaven, took care of the whole
problem. He instituted the
priesthood, and every Catholic
has the privilege and duty of
unloading his sins on the
priest.
Sins are terribly personal.
They’re the only thing, in fact,
that we can really call our
own. Good works we accom
plish with God’s help. But
your sins — they’re yours.
One of the greatest moments
of history, then, was when
Christ said to His apostles,
“Receive the Holy Spirit.
Whose sins you shall forgive,
they are forgiven them, and
whose sins you shall retain,
they are retained.”
These words of the Savior
are the answer to the ques
tion of those outside the
Church: “Why do you confess
your sins to the priest?” Be
cause Christ wants us to, that’s
why.
That’s why, moreover, the
renowned convert, G. K.
Chesterton, was drawn to the
Faith. “I entered the Catholic
Church,” he once said, “to get
rid of my sins.”
It was getting rid of her
sins that brought peace and
happiness to Helen Hayes, the
“first Idav of the American
theatre,” three years ago. She
had been awav from the
Church almost 30 years. On
the day of her return, she
walked around the block 20
times reciting the Rosary be
fore she could summon enough
courage to enter the confes
sional.
After it was over, however.
Miss Hayes said. “It was as if
the years had fallen away and
I was a little child again, safe
in a world I’d almost lost, re
turned to it at last.”
Every Catholic whose Faith
is in good working condition
feels somewhat the same jov
after a good spiritual cleans
ing on Saturday night. It’s not
that grace has so much to do
v/ith feelings. It’s just that of
all the experiences of Faith,
the one that gives the greatest
“lift” is the forgiveness of
sins.
It’s not often wo should
feel the urge to borrow sins.
We all have enough of, them
crying for recognition. If the
weeks have rolled by and we
just can’t think of anyth ins
to say, a good examination of
conscience is in order.
Haste makes waste — of the
nrecious graces we should be
setting from confession. Mrs.
Zilch is double-parked, facing
the wrong way on a one-way
street, so she zips in and out
of church so fast the confes
sional curtain is still fluttering
as she starts the engine. Ee-
amination — nil.
Mr. Zilch receives the sac
rament of Penance every Holy
Saturday, whether he needs it
or not. There’s enough time
to examine several consci. nces
in the long line, but he spends
his time examining the crazy
hat on tire lady across the
aisle. Result: “Bless me, Fa
ther, for I have sinned. My
last confession was a year ago.
I was impatient two times.
That’s all.” A whole year and
only two little sins of impa
tience? Mrs. Zilch married a
saint.
There are, after all, - ten
commandments— each cover
ing a multitude of sins. There
are the precepts of the Church,
the capital sins, and various
other virtues and vices that
should be included in a good
examination of conscience.
If the examination is good,
the actual confession will be
equally good. And the peace
and joy of a conscience
cleansed will make the time
and effort seem as nothing.
uestion
1m
By DAVID Q. LIPTAK
G. Isn't the term "rosary"
a generic one, there being
several other rosaries be
sides the Rosary of Our
Lady? Isn't there, for in
stance, a Rosary of the Sev
en Dolors?
A. The term “rosary” should
properly be used only with
reference to the Rosary Devo
tion- (i.e., the Rosary of Our
Lady) or to the beads com
monly used for the Rosary
Devotion.
THE ROSARY DEVOTION,
as defined by Pope Pius V, is
“the psalter of Mary, in which
the Blessed Mother of God is
greeted one hundred and fifty
(or fifty) times with the An
gelic Salutation . . . together
with the Our Father for every
ten Hail Marys and also cer
tain meditations that represent
the entire life of Jesus.”
FROM THIS definition it is
evident that beads are not es
sential to the Rosary. All the
general Rosary indulgences,
including the plenary indul
gence for reciting the Rosary
before the Blessed Sacrament,
can be gained so long as the
prescribed Paters and Aves
are said with the required
meditation.
BUT IF BLESSED BEADS
are used, many extraordinary
snecial indulgences can be
gained in addition to the gen
eral Rosary indulgences listed
in official prayer books. The
kind and number of these spe
cial indulgences depend upon
the blessings imparted to the
beads. These special indul
gences are popularly known as
the ABCD indulgences (i.e.,
Apostolic, Brigittine, Crosier
and Dominican). Apostolic in
dulgences are bestowed by the
Holy Father; the others, by
priests having the necessary
various faculties.
STRINGS OF BEADS resem
bling Rosaries should rightly
be referred to as “chaplets.”
Such is the judgment of the
Holy See on the matter. In the
word s of Pone Leo YTTT again:
''THE TRUE FORM Of; the
Rosary is to be preserved in
reference to the beads by mak
ing them up into five, ten or
fifteen decades; likewise, that
other beads, or whatsoever
form are not to he known by
the name of the Rosary.”
FURTHER, it is the'mind of
of the Church that no Rosary-
iike devotions or beads be in
troduced without explicit per
mission. Approval has been
given for a few such devo
tions, including the Brigittine
Chaplet, the Franciscan Chan-
let of the Seven Joys and the
Servile Chaplet of the Seven
Dolors.
8Ipe HttUrtitt
41S 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. Ga. Send
notice of change of address to P. O. Box 320, Monroe, Ga.
REV. FRANCIS J. DONOHUE REV. R. DONALD KTERNAN
Editor Savannah Edition Editor Atlanta Edition
JOHN MARKWALTER
Managing Editor
Vol. 41 Saturday, October 29, 1960 No. 11
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 MARKWALTER, Augusta Executive Secretary
MISS CEGILE FERRY, Augusta Financial Secretary