Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

PAGE 4—THE BULLETIN, July 7, 1962 Month of the Precious Blood A DANGEROUS DECISION Whatever the harm done to the children of New York State by the United States Supreme Court last week, the unfortu nate decision handed down in the “Regents Prayer” Case may pose a very grave dan ger to the entire Nation. For it serves to advance, among the unwary the dan gerous and un-American notion that governmental “neutrality” in the field of religion necessarily pre cludes any and all religious influence from public life and institutions. Mr. Justice Douglas’ con curring opinion goes so far as to challenge the practice of opening Congressional and Court Sessions with prayer as well as the custom in many states, of appointing official chaplains for their legis latures on the grounds that “once government finances a religious exercise it inserts a divisive influence into our communities.” The public ac ceptance of, and even enthus iasm for, these practices and customs for more than 175 years is refutation enough for Mr. Douglas’ charge. For the United States is not, after all, a ‘secular nation.’ Its heritage, spirit and highest ideals are neither ‘agnostic’ nor ‘atheistic.’ And, contrary to the claims of those who profess to be the victims of discrimination by official gov- ermental acknowledgment of God, it remains a fact that the highest court in the land, an official arm of the fed eral government has declared that we are “a religious nation.” Said the Court in 1892 (Holy Trinity Church vs. United States), “This is historically true. From the discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a single voice making this affirmation . . . “If we examine the con stitutions of the various States we find in them a constant re cognition of “religious obliga tions.” Every Constitution of every one of the forty-four states contains language which either directly or by clear im plication recognizes a pro found reverence for religion and an assumption that its influence in ALL human affairs is essential to the. well being o f the com munity . . . “There is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language per vading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and re affirm THAT THIS IS A RE LIGIOUS NATION. These are not individual sayings, dec larations of private persons; they are “ORGANIC UTTER ANCES: THEY SPEAK THE VOICE OF THE ENTIRE PEOPLE.” Finally, to those who sup pose that the Government must be indifferent to religion, or that it can even afford to be, we recommend these wo rds of the Father of our Country: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and mor ality are indispensable sup ports. “IN VAIN WOULD THAT MAN CLAIM THE AT TRIBUTE OF PATRIOTISM WHO SHOULD LABOR TO SUBVERT THESE GREAT PILLARS OF HUMAN HAPPI NESS, THE FIRMEST PROPS OF THE DUTIES OF MEN AND CITIZENS” . . . Let it sim ply be asked, where is the security for property, for re putation, for life, if the SENSE OF RELIGIOUS OBLIGATION desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice . . . “It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a neces sary spring of popular govern ment. The rule indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free govern ment. WHO THAT IS A SIN CERE FRIEND TO IT, CAN LOOK WITH INDIFFERENCE UPON ATTEMPTS TO SHAKE THE FOUNDATION OF THE FABRIC?” (Emphasis Ours) IS WIRETAPPING 'DIRTY BUSINESS’? Sum and Substance New York City was stirred recently by the death of a 19- year-old girl in a doctor's office. District Attourney Frank O’Connor of Queens County ob tained a warrant for the arrest of the physi cian on an abortion charge. He said his men had been “ observing ” the doctor’s office for three weeks but had not tapped his telephone because of the dubious legality of wiretapping. “If there had been wiretapping in this case,’’ said O’Connor, “this girl's life probably would have been saved.” The old debate about wire tapping has been going on now for many years. A number of states have passed very specific laws about this form of eavesdropping but Congress has been reluctant to clear up the obscurity in Federal law on the subject. Some juristictions and legis lators argue for a total ban on all wiretapping and they usually base their case on “the right to privacy.” They point to large scale violations of this right all over the country. A few years ago in New York it was discovered that a band of private detectives were oper ating an arrangement whereby they could listen in on 100,000 telephone lines in Manhattan. s Businessmen tap the lines of competitors, labor racketeers REV. JOHN B. SHEERIN. C.S.P. tap the phones of hostile wit nesses in court cases and some companies even have their own phones tapped to track down thefts of employees. Those who argue for a total ban on wiretapping agree with Justice Holmes that all wire tapping is “dirty business.” There is another viewpoint, however, that disagrees with Holmes. The lawyers and lawmakers who hold this second viewpoint claim that some wiretapping is legitimate provided it is done under proper Constitutional restrictions. They consider it not only legitimate but even necessary for protection of the civil community against organized gangsters. In New York, Maryland,Nev ada and Massachusetts the state law permits law officers to wiretap provided they give evidence before a judge showing reasonable cause to believe that a certain crime has been or is about to be committed. The permission can be given by the judge only for a restricted class of crimes and for a specific phone. The Federal law, in contrast to these state laws, is very obscure. The Federal Commun ications Act forbids anyone to ’’intercept and divulge” mes sages. The FBI have taken that to mean that wiretapping is allowed but cannot be used as evidence in courtrooms. Attourney General Kennedy has been asking Congress to clear up this chaotic situation and to frame a law which will permit, under stringent safe guards, the gathering and use of wiretapping evidence in cer tain classes of cases. It is noteworthy that Great Britain and Canada, which pride themselves on their concern for civil liberties, allow limit ed wiretapping. The Fourth Amendment does not forbid all searches and seizures but only those that are “unreasonable.” The prin ciple that a man’s home is his castle has been subjected by American courts to reasonable exceptions for the sake of the common good. Our courts have allowed police to read private letters provided the letters have been seized by permission of a judge or court. In this way, law enforcers have been able to discover information about per sons reasonably suspected of criminal activity. Good law tries to strike a balance between security of private rights and protection of the community. Last year, District Attourney Frank Hogan of New York City had a strong case against seven national narcotic distributors operating a multi-million dol lar ring. Yet he had to abandon the case because much of his evidence came from wire tapping. The present Federal law pro hibited him from introducing this evidence. It’s time for Congress to stop “dragging its feet” and to start action on a new law that would safeguard reasonable privacy and at the same time enable law officers to stamp out organized crime. sr<r sUC/ ' .-'O'?'A* < ■ -'A MUST MEN BITE DOGS? It Seems to Me At the root of many of jour nalism’s error is the old say ing of a famous editor that if a dog bites a man, that’s not news; but if a man bites a dog, that’s emphatically news. The state ment was in tended to em phasize that news is not w h a t is routine, but what is unusual. But that concept is much too superficial to serve as a philosophy of journalism. In the ruthless struggle for circulation, many editors ca tered to the lowest instincts of readers by playing up the sen sational and sordid. In doing so, they whetted the appetite for more of the same. . . or worse. Journalists taught readers to savor trash and vice. Then they tried to justify their publica tions by arguing that people wanted that sort of thing . . , “we’re only holding a mirror up to life . . .and we’ve got to stay in business.” No one’s got to stay in the business of the sordid.. .and the mirror reflected mainly not life, but the dregs of life. The chairman of General Foods Corp., Charles G. Mor timer, in his address to the American Newspaper Pub lishers Association, put the matter this way: “It is said that there is no news in decency and virtue . . . I believe there is. Recently my hometown paper has been suc cessfully featuring stories of juvenile DECENCY . . .After all, news can be what you make it. Leo Burnett, an able Chica go advertising agent, says good advertising is built around the 'inherent drama’ in a product. May there not be ‘inherent drama’ in much that is con structive that people are doing . . . ?” There not only may be-there is. Journalism can com municate the “excitement of the constructive” to readers any time they choose to do so. After all, they communicate it to their children at home. They take the lazy way when they fill publications with trash, to the serious injury of the free world and the degradation of readers. Some sections of the religious press are dull--although not de grading. But some religious publications are bright, because they are produced by journalists who “feel the excitement of the constructive” and communicate it. Mr. Mortimer told the edi tors that he is confident that journalists are inventive and creative enought to present the constructive interestingly if they will put their minds to it. He proposed an experiment: “Once or twice a week, for the next month, sit down with JOSEPH BREIG the day’s issue of your own newspaper. Read it through, column by column, paragraph by paragraph, and mark with a red pencil--red for danger-- every heading, subhead, cap tion, article, editorial, feature or cartoon which you feel would be likely to serve the evil pur poses of Mr. Khrushchev and his scheming minions, or of other unfriendly politicians or agitators . . . “In the same spirit, and with equal earnestness, I would ask my fellow advertisers to join me in sitting down every so often with copies of their com pany’s current advertisements- and a red pencil—and reading them with the same critical eyes, editing not only for honesty but for good taste.” In advertising as in other forms of communication, Mr. Mortimer insisted, “freedom of speech and of the press” should be tempered with “wis dom of speech and of the press. ’ ’ Mr. Mortimer’s appeal was concerned with false ideas of the free world which are propa gated abroad by American pub lications, movies and the like. We need a right phislsophv of journalism. We need a right morality of journalism also. A journalist has no more right to howl scandals in headlines than a housewife has to whisper them over the telephone, or behind her hand at neighborhood gath erings. THE JOURNALIST, in fact, has less right, because he is reaching countless more ears than the gossipping woman. The harm that he does is multiplied. Journalists should develop a pride of profession; they should decline to be reduced to the role of peeping Toms holding vigil around the haunts of mor ally loose celebrities. Mr. Mortimer challenged journalists to “reflect more of the time a picture” of “reasonably intelligent people, going about their affairs with a great deal of decency, efficiency, purposefulness and goodwill; a people genuinely concerned with the peace of the world and the welfare of others, whether their skins be white, black, brown or yellow. “ I hope the editors and adver tisers were listening. "LIFE IS DEEDS NOT DAYS" Jottings By BARBARA C. JENCKS “We live in deeds, not years; in thoughts, not breaths.” * * * Why did the Atlanta-bound plane from Paris crash, killing men and women who added so muchi to a city, state and nation? “Why did a man like Dr. Dooley die at 34 while others live out useless, empty lives wearing out their welcome on earth?” This question is asked in a hundred ways in time of the tragedy, untimely deaths. Why do the good have to die so young of such tragic deaths? History is filled with records of the untimely deaths of young and gifted- Mozart, Keats, Shelley, Byron. I think of my own particular literary favorites: Thomas Wolfe, Dylan Thomas, Rupert Brooke, Joyce Kilmer and Padraic Pearse. None of these poets and writers saw their fortieth birthd t> . Some spent themselves in pursuite of their art. Brooke, Kilmer, Pearse will be remembered as patriots and heroes as well as artists. Their deaths had reason. It is not how long we live but how we live which marks our star for eternity. Thomas Wolfe seemed to sense that he was haunted by early death when he wrote: ’“Something has spoken to me in the night and told me that I shall die. . . to find a land more kind than home, more large than earth.” Dylan Thomas with his savage attack on life became stilled in a quiet beauty when he mediatated on his birthday: “It was my thirtieth year to heaven stood there then in the summer noon. Though the town below lay leaved with October Blood. O may my heart’s truth still besung on this high hill in a year’s turning?” And there was Joyce Kilmer, man, soldier, child of God, who wrote: “Lord thou didst suffer more for me than all the hosts of land and sea. So let me render back again this millionth of Thy gift.” And Pearse, the Irish patriot-poet, and some say saint, who wrote: “I have squandered the splendid years that the Lord God gave my youth in attempting impossible things, deeming them alone worth the toil.” The greatest life ever was lived in thirty-three years (Continued on Page 5) L DORIS REVERE PETERS nAwerA YOUTH SHOULD SHE INVITE BOY TO COME IN, GIRL INQUIRES Dear Doris: Should you ask a boy to come in when he takes you home after a date? Delores This depends on the time and how well you know the boy. If it is early, and your pa rents are up it’s all right to ask him in. There might even be time for a sandwich and coke. If you arrive home late your date won’t expect to be invited in. However, he will not want to leave you standing on the front steps or outside an apartment building. You can say good-bye and thank you just inside the door. WHAT KIND OF EYEGLASSES WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE? Dear Doris: We had our eyes examined in school last week and I have to wear glasses. What color frames would look best on me? I have light brown hair (not quite blond) and blue eyes. I am 16. Judy There are many light brown and light tortoise shell frames that should harmonize with your coloring. For contrast, you might also look well in a light blue frame--if it is the right shape. Besides color, the shape of the frame should also be attractive. Try on many before making a choice. PARISH CLUBS FOR WIDOWS AND WIDOWERS Dear Doris: I would like to know why the churches do not have clubs for widows and widowers ?The have sodalities for single girls and guilds and societies for the married men and women, so why can’t they have a club for widows and widowers? It would be real nice to have a Catholic club like that so we could have a social life. Any thing you can do to get some thing like this started would be appreciated by many of us who would like to have a night out once in a while. Mary Some of the most active mem bers of the Altar Societies are widows. Many active Holy Name Society members are widowers. There are many other church groups which do not exclude you because of your marital status or age. Check with your pastor. There are probably one or more groups of particular interest to you already inexistence. And pastors always appreciate knowing of women who have the motivation and energy to devote time to parish activities. It is not the policy of this column to promote any particu lar club or group. And since in your letter (condensed above) you indicated a certain neighborhood within an area it appears to be a local or parish problem. If there are no organizations or activities in your parish perhaps your pastor will appreciate your help in getting one started. ACCEPT INVITATION, GO TO PARTY, GIRL IS TOLD Dear Doris: Recently I was asked to a party a month away by a boy I like very much. Then I broke up with him because he did not want me to talk to other boys. Now I miss him and would like to see him again. But how can I break the ice? To complicate this another boy has asked me to the party. What should I do? Confused First, make up your mind as to whether you really want to renew a friendship with a boy who is so possessive. He sounds unreasonable. How can you not speak to other boys, particularly at a party? All you can do about breaking the ice is to wait. When you see him again be casual, plea sant and friendly. He may or may not invite you out again. O f course you could tell him outright you have changed your mind and would like to go to the party. But this could prove embarrassing. Suppose he has asked someone else in- the meantime? My suggestion is to accept the invitation of the second boy, go to the party and have a good time. YOUTH WORRIES UNDULY ABOUT RECEIVING LINES Dear Doris: I’m worried. Would you please tell me what is the procedure at a Prom when there is a receiving line of chaperons? Johnny Don’t worry. The receiving line is usually near the door so the procedure of “going through it” is over in a hurry. It’s painless and often fun. Whether the chaperon knows you or not, give your name to the one first in line. (Chaperons are human, too, and often draw a blank when they see a familiar face in a large crowd.) Then introduce your date by men tioning the chaperons name first, such as “Mrs. Smith this is Mary Jones.” (Doris Revere Peters ans wers letters through her column, not by mail. Please do not ask for a personal re ply. Young readers are invited to write to her in care of The Bulletin.) I QUESTION BOX j \ j (By David Q. Liptak) Q. Relative to the ques tion of federal aid to education, which was discussed recently, how would one go about an swering these objections: (1) The public schools constitute “the cradle of democracy and the bulwark of the nation,” hence they alone should be sup ported by government; (2) Private schools are like private beaches or play grounds, hence those who want them should pay for them. themselves; and (3) If a fede ral aid program to all schools, private as well as public, be comes law, it would result in the strange circumstance of Catholics helping support Pro testant schools, as well as their own. Could you answer these in brief? A. The assertion that the pub lic schools comprise “the cra dle of democracy and the bul wark of the nation” is true in the same sense that the (Continued on Page 5) 416 8TH ST., AUGUSTA, GA. Published fortnightly by tile Catholic Laymen’s Association of Georgia, Inc., with the Approbation of the Most Reverend Bishop of Savannah; and the Most Reverend Archbishop of Atlanta. Subscription price $3.00 per year. Subscription in cluded in membership in Catholic Laymen’s Association. 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 Kiernan Editor Savannah Edition Editor Atlanta Edition John Markwalter, Managing Editor Rev. Lawrence Lucree, Rev. John Fitzpatrick Associate Editors, Savannah Edition Vol. 43 Saturday, July 7, 1962 No. 3 ASSOCIATION OFFICERS GEORGE GINGELL, Columbus President MRS. DAN HARRIS, Macon Vice-President NICK CAMERIO, Macon Secretary JOHN T. BUCKLEY, Augusta Treasurer ALVIN M. McAULIFFE, Augusta Auditor JOHN MARKWALTER, Augusta Executive Secretary MISS CECILE FERRY, Augusta Financial Secretary