Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

4 THE BULLETIN OF THE CATHOLIC LAYMEN’S ASSOCIATION OF GEORGIA CREMATION, BAPTISM AND EXCLUSIVENESS Below are found a typical letter to the Publicity Bureau and the reply thereto. The limits of The Bulletin forbid giving space to more than one in a single issue, but this is reproduced because it not only displays the style of correspondence followed, but also contains information useful to the layman who frequently meets similar questioning. The sub jects of Baptism, Cremation, the attitude of Cath olics toward non-Catholic ceremonials, the oft-re peated assertion about Catholic exclusiveness, are all touched upon, and much information not generally at the finger tips of the average layman is furnished. Here is the letter without name and address which, of course, it would not be seemly to publish: “I am in receipt of your letters about cremation and the burning of Huss, and if I am correctly in formed it is admitted by your Church that Christ was immersed, and if this be true, why is it you do im merse instead of sprinkling? You lay stress on the fact that because Christ’s body was not cremated it would be wrong to cremate now, and why not apply the same rule to baptism? And if your Church be the only true one, as you claim, why is it you are not more practical and open to an outsider or non- Catholic? For instance, you refuse to bury the dead or marry the living or refuse to attend any religious services unless it is all Catholic, and you know all can’t be Catholics. How can we? Take, for in stance, this town has at least a population of 1 0,000, and the priest comes here once a month and stays at one place, and so far as I know never goes out anywhere other than to the church. Why don’t your priest do like the twelve, go in the streets and by ways and preach? How can we non-Catholics know unless you do? “Please understand I have nothing but the kindest feelings for your church, and I merely ask these ques tions as a matter of information.’’ The Reply. Permit me to say, first, that you are mistaken in your thought that Catholics admit that Christ was immersed. It is not certain, exegetically, historically or traditionally, in what form Christ received bap tism. Second, the form of administering this sacra ment followed among Catholics is not sprinkling, but pouring. Third, cremation is not a wrong thing in itself, but in the mind of the Church it is an unbecom ing thing for Christians. The Church recognizes any form of baptism as essentially valid, provided the words are spoken and the water is administered by the same person at the same time, and it makes no difference whether the person ministering is a Catholic or not. Any person of any religion, or one of no religion, can validly ad minister baptism, by applying water to the person to be baptized and at the same time saying the words: “I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.’’ It is Catholic belief that, as Christ said to Nicodemus, “Unless a man be born of water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” Therefore, this sacrament, which is so necessary for all, should be, as far as possible, at all times, available. Hence, our Lord chose water, a most common and abundant element on this planet, as the material, while any person hav ing the use of reason can act as minister, and the form, likewise, it would seem, should be one adapted to every circumstance where the material and the min ister can be had. Nothing more, we Catholics be lieve, should be required for the valid reception of this sacrament without which we cannot enter Heaven. Why Not Immersion? But immersion is, of course, very inconvenient; at times it is impossible. It must have been impossible to St. Peter while he was in prison, where, you will remember, he administered baptism. Likewise, it must have been impossible for him to immerse the 5,000 persons converted on the first Pentecost Day. How could one asking to be baptized be immersed while pinned under a wreck; when shot and dying on the battlefield; in various other circumstances that you can readily imagine? The Church meets every con dition. Like the Sabbath, the Church was made for man. Catholics do not refuse to bury the dead who were not Catholics. On the contrary, they are required by the strictest law of the Church to bury the dead and to do all other acts of charity that our common humanity dictates, without giving a thought to the religion of those in need. And they fail in their Catholicity who fail in charity toward their fellow- man of whatever creed, color or condition of life. True, non-Catholics are not buried with the rites of the Church, for surely it is not for the Church to impose her good offices on one dead when such an one while living showed no willingness to accept them. The Priest and Marriage. As to marrying the living, who not a Catholic would wish to be married according to the teaching of the Church, in preference to the teaching of their own religion? And why? After all, do you know that the sacrament of marriage is administered by the parties themselves, that a priest, when the cere mony is performed before him, is there merely as the official witness of the Church and to give her blessing to the union of her children, that Protestants married before their ministers administer to each other the holy sacrament no less than do Catholics when mar ried before a priest, the blessing of the Church alone being lacking?