Newspaper Page Text
k
TONE 2f, 1937
THE BULLETIN OF THE CATHOLIC LAYMENS ASSOCIATION OF GEORGIA
THHEH
“Peter Whiffin' 9 Retracts Article in Forum
Readers' Digest and Forum
Publish Michael Williams'
Reply to Original Article
Brooding Over Own Failure Prompted Writing of Story
Because of Desire to Be Regarded as Martyr, “Peter
Whiffin” Confesses in Retraction
(By N. C. W. C. News Service) 1 garded as rather .petty. And I con-
NEW YORK. - In the issue of The «™ed .this opmion that my breth
Forum magazine which has just made
its appearance, “Peter Whiffin’’ re
tracts and expresses deep regret for
his article entitled “A Priest Warns
the Church,’ containing attacks upon
the Catholic clergy, which was print
ed in the April issue of the, same
magazine.
The priest, who has now returned
to his religious duties, says in his
retraction that some years ago he
thought he was quite a figure among
the members of his religious congre
gation, but that when he failed in an
undertaking entrusted to him, instead
of placing the blame on himself,
where it belonged, he blamed his fel
low religious and became resentful.
He declares that his article in The
Forum presented such a “distorted
and magnified’ picture of the Church
and priesthood in America "as to be
almost monstrous’’ and that he wrote
it “simply because I had convinced
myself through bitter brooding over
my own misfortunes and constant
preoccupation with money abuses in
the Church that it might vindicate
my own failure as a priest and do
the Church a service at the same
time by dilating on the ‘commercia
lism of religion.’ ”
He then states that later he woke
up to “the fact that I had not pre
sented the case fairly . . . precisely
when I discovered that I wasn’t go
ing to be regarded as a martyr to
truth, after all.” On the whole, he
adds, “the attitude of priests as a
people was one of pity and sadness
for me that I had spoken not the
truth but a lie.” From his brethren
in his congregation, he testifies, he
received not condemnation, but “a
charity and forgiveness” that opened
his eyes to the truth and led to his
present retraction.
The Forum, also in its current is
sue, prints an article of considerable
length by Michael Williams, editor of
The Commonweal, entitled “The
Church Warns Her Priests—An An
swer to Peter Whiffin. ”
Following the appearance of the
original article, and the attendant
discussion it caused. The Forum was
asked to print the reply to the Whif
fin article, and to this The Forum
agreed. The Readers’ Digest, which
had printed a condensation of the
Whiffin article, agreed also to print
a condensation of the reply, and it
has done so in its issue which has
just made its appearance.
ren had of me by not being able to
stomach my sudden eclipse. As the
boys say, I couldn’t take it.
“For a while I sulked and pouted
in an inferior job, but suddenly I de
cided that I had'never been truly ap
preciated by my congregation and
that I must go elsewhere in the
priesthood to attain my real stature.
With the passing of years that real
stature steadily diminished, while
just as steadily my brooding bitter
ness increased Trying to place the
blame for my misfortunes on every
one and everything save on myself
and shortcomings became my favorite
pastime. And at last I succeeded in
convincing myself that the real rea
son for my ‘ruination’ was due to the
fact that my Superiors had given me
a job of money chasing. Sure, that
was it! Had not the worst foes of the
Church and the priesthood always
come from the money evil? And was
I not just another innocent victim
who had been spoiled by this unholy
business of commercialized religion?
DR. FORD RECEIVES
THE LAETARE MEDAL
99
Award Made at Commence
ment at University of
Notre Dame
(By N. C. W. C. News Service)
NOTRE DAME, Wis.—Notre Dame
University, at its annual commence
ment exercises, conferred degrees
upon 469 graduates yesterday.
In connection with the exercises
the 1937 Laetare Medal was conferred
upon Prof. Jeremiah D. M. Ford, of
Harvard University, “in recognition
of Catholic scholarship and for fos
tering international understanding
and -aspect.”
The honorary degree. Doctor of
Laws, was conferred upon the Most
Rev. Karl J. Alter, Bishop of Toledo,
Joseph P. Grace, of New York, and
William S- Calcott, of Wilmington,
Del.
Guernica “Mass Slaughter
Myth, Bishop O'Hara Shows
in Letter to Morning News
Leftists, Not Rightists, Burned City, His Excellency
Proves in Letter Pointing Out How American Press
and People Have Been De ceived by Red Propaganda
“With the heartening ‘yes’ that I
answered to both these questions, it
was simple now to argue that it was
my duty to cry out against the ‘fi
nancial evils in the Church.’ Thus I
would be doing her an heroic service.
Nor could anyone, I thought, question
the sincerity of my motives, since in
‘exposing” the abuses I myself would
take the risk of being completely
crushed by my ecclesiastical Super
iors. In other words. I now had an
other vision. This time I was to be
a pure martyr sacrificing myself in
attacking the ‘money evil in the
Church,’ as I had once been sacrificed
in trying to foster it, I would be a
modern Savonarola.
“Thus was bom the soul-stirring
opus of Peter Whippin (R. I. P.). en
titled ‘We Priests Should Worry.’ re
titled by mv publisher, ‘A Priest
Warns the Church.’
must have known that the external
honors paid to Cardinals are given
only because of the dignity of Him
they represent. I spoke about the
money drives of priests without again
mentioning that the money was not
for them but for churches i and
schools for their people. I spoke of
the abuses in the relic devotions
without remarking that their real
purpose is a good one. I described the
monks and their money boxes with
out adding that the same monks use
so little of the money for themselves
that they sleep on straw beds in mo
nastic cells and live lives of absolute
sacrifice.
O — 0
| CLASSMATES MARTYRED
o :
“I talked slightingly of the Foreign
Missions when I must have known
that the law of charity as well as the
command of Christ urged them upon
the Church as a solemn duty, and
when I might have recalled how two
of my own classmates were martyred
in China, while others of my breth
ren are living lives of martyrdom far
in the interior of that country, tend
ing the sick, burying the dead, feed
ing the starving, dressing even the
sores of the lepers, giving up every
thing else as they have surrendered
home and loved ones, to make Christ
known and loved by those who, un
like people in our own land, have
never had an opportunity to know
and love Him.
In a letter to the Savannah Mor n’ng News prompted by an editorial,
“Mass Slaughter in Spain”, the Most Rev. Gerald P. O’Hara, D.D., J.U.D^
Bishop of Savannah-Atlanta, showed that the “mass slaughter” on which
the editorial was"'based never took place, and that this story and many
others were fabricated as propagan da in order to inspire distrust of and
hatred for the Rightist forces, oppos ing the Snanish Leftists with whom
the Communists and Anarchists ar e aligned. The letter of Bishop O’Hara
follows:
Editor Morning News: The editorial
entitled “Mass Slaughter in Spain,”
appearing in today’s Savannah Morn
ing News” (Monday. May 17. 1937).
was read by me with great interest,
particularly in view of the fact that
it describes an event which never took
place. Let me give you the facts re
garding the siege of Guernica, the an
cient Basque capital.
The taking of Guernica was report
ed by Reuter over short wave, the
news coming from so-called “Loyal
ist” sources. The brave defenders of
the city set it on fire to oppose a wall
of flame to the oncoming insurgent
troops. This act was spoken of as clev
er strategy. The retreating soldiers
fortified a church beyond the town
and for a while were able to hold back
the advance.
However, this was before Peter
Whiffin made his retraction. Upon
his writing this. The Forum was re
quested to print the retraction. It
pleaded that its forms were closed,
and that it could only print the re
traction as a paid advertisement. It
is in this form, with an advertising
rate paid, that the retraction appears.
O O
| TEXT OF RETRACTION |
O O
The text of the retraction, entitled
“Peter Whiffin Tells the Whole
Truth,” follows:
“A Striking proof that we human
beings must be descended from a
primary couple such as Adam and
Eve lies in the fact that we resemble
them so markedly in their outstand
ing trait of trying to dodge respon
sibility for wrongdoing. ‘The woman
gave it me.’ said Adam, after eating
the forbidden fruit. ‘The serpent
tempted me,’ said Eve. And trying
to ‘pass the buck’ has been a domi
nant character of their children ever
since.
‘Ah, it was so easily written. A
few touches of past history, the pres
ent situation in Spain, and then on
with a sweeping flourish to the
Church in America. The mushroom
growth of the Church here from pov
erty to wealth was illustrated by the
rise of a certain Monsignor from ‘tent
dweller’ to pastor of a'great parish in
Brooklyn. From that I passed
at once to the tremendous increase in
religious institutions, the affluence of
some of the secular clergy with their
cars and golf and vacations, the in
come tax report on Cardinal O’Con
nell's ‘personal holdings,’ the gold
telephones of a couple of Bishops, the
millions of dollars lost in stock ven
tures or brought to Rome by the
clergy, the Cardinal’s Red Train to
the Eucharistic Congress in Chicago,
the bazaars and drives for money by
the priests, the relic devotions, the
gathering of funds for the Foreign
Missions, and above all the ‘indif
ference' of priests as a class to the
sufferings of the poor, as seen from
their ‘curtained windows.’ (These last
two words. I believe were supplied
by my publisher, unsolicited). I tried
to bring out how the recent Election
Campaign had shown that our influ
ence with the masses was waning. I
strove to contrast the ‘aloofness’ of
priests as a class with the spirit of
the Communists who go down day
and night among the poor, and I clos
ed with a sad warning about the
growth of anti-clericalism in America
being our own fault.
“I tried the stunt recently in an
article that I wrote, entitled ‘A Priest
Warns the Church.’ in which I at
tempted to put the blame for my own
priestly shortcomings on the Church
at large and on my fellow priests in
particular. I feel that I must tell
just how I came to do this. And if
anyone thinks that I am being “in
fluenced’ to write this article let me
say at the outset that I am being in
fluenced’—by a selfish motive. Writ
ing it, I hope, may help me to live a
little less hatefully with myself,
even if it accomplishes nothing else.
So, here goes.
“Some years ago I cut quite a fig
ure among the priests of a certain Re
ligious congregation. I thought I did,
anyhow, especially when as a young
priest I was chosen to raise funds for
a new foundation; and I had apoca
lyptic visions of doing great things
and of becoming a big man. I failed,
however, to make either of these
pleasant dreams a reality, through
nobody’s fault but my own. Indeed,
my financial ventures went so ridi
culously awry that I became an ob
ject of pity rather than of envy. In
stead of being looked up to as a big
man I became more and more re-
“Ah. I say, it was so easy to give
this side of the picture of the Church
in America —and leave out all the
other sides. I didn’t say, for example,
that the Brooklyn Monsignor I spoke
about had spent his life building up
his parish—only for his people. I did
not point out that the remarkable
growth of religious institutions such
as schools and hospitals and orphan
ages and asylums is only an indica
tion of how the spirit of charity is so
alive in the Church and that while
some of the institutions might seem
pretentious, the religious who live in
them practice lives of strict poverty
and complete sacrifice. I didn’t re
mark that while some priests have
cars and golf and vacations, which,
after all they should have in some
measure as human beings who need
recreation, many more are too poor
to buy themselves decent clothes.
“I should have known that the
‘personal property’ of Cardinal
O'Connell is really the property of
his diocese.' The gold telephones of
two Bishops in America had been
given to them, though I neglected to
say so. nor did I state the fact that
most Bishops live lives of poverty in
private. I did not observe that the
money used in stock ventures, was
after all, legitimately invested, and I
failed to bring out how money
brought to Rome is used for the
spread of religion and piety and the
building of charitable institutions. I
I spoke of the priest’s ‘indiffer
ence’ toward the poor, although I
know that priests turned away as
young men from the world so that
they might help the poor, and do,
with few exceptions, help them to
the best of their ability. I spoke of
the Communists being down among
the poor teaching them to revolt, and,
I should have added, to hate God;
but I said nothing of the fact that
the ordinary priest is quite ready to
go anywhere and do anything to lead
the poor to God. In a word, if a half-
truth is sometimes worse than a lie,
my two per cent of the true picture
of the ‘money evil’in the Church was
worse than the lowest kind of fraud.
It was but a small part of the com
plete story of the Church and the
priesthood in America, so distorted
and magnified as to be almost mon
strous. And why did I do it Simply
because I had convinced myself
through bitter brooding over my own
misfortunes and constant preoccupa
tion with money abuses in the
Church that I might vindicate my
own failure as a priest and do the
Church a service at the same time by
dilating on the ‘commercialization of
religion.’
“When did I wake up to the fact
that I had not presented the case
fairly? Precisely when I discovered
that I wasn’t going to be regarded as
a martyr to truth, after alL
“A few priests and Catholics did,
naturally, react bitterly. Several
Catholic papers challenged my state
ments and especially my conclusions.
But on the whole the attitude of
priests and people was one of pity
and sadness for me that I had spoken
not the truth but a he. Some of my
clerical friends came to see me. They
admitted that there are and always
have been money evils in religion as
in everything else. But they also
pointed out that many great and
good men have exposed these abuses
in the Church much more clearly and
certainly more honestly than I had
done, and are constantly fighting to
remove them. The common tone to
wards me was one of sympathy and
sorrow. I was not to be hailed as a
hero or martyr. I was to be prayed
for.
When it was discovered that the
burning of the city had destroyed
many civilians, an opportunity was
offered for another explanation. The
correspondent of ‘The London Times”
deliberately invented all the details
of an airplane massacre. When this
was published, the insurgent genera]
broke his customary silence. He of
fered to prove to neutral observers,
by showing them his military orders
that no such bombing had taken place.
He disclaimed all responsibility for
the deaths of the civilians. Our news
papers have forgotten to print this in
teresting items of news. This disclaim
er forced the propagandists to turn to
another invention: They said that a
mysterious air squadron direct from
Germany did the damage. Its purpose
was terrorism. It was to be a demon
stration of what Dorothy Thompson,
in heavy type which appeared some
days ago in the “Philadelphia In
quirer”. and probably in other paDers,
called “Fascist Warfare.” The Ger
mans at once denied the story as a
fantastic and self-evident lie. Mean
while our newspapers, knowing our
weakness for sensationalism, shouted
for vengeance on the baby-killers.
which all Europe is critically involved
and in which the United States is vi
tally concerned.”
Mr. Williams asserts that in trying
to interpret this news editorially, the
directors of the American press have
become what he terms “unconscious
propagandists” for the “Loyalist” gov
ernment, and he asserts that they have
given a false, incomplete picture of
the situation in Spain.
“Since the first frightful days of
the Spanish tragedy.” he points out.
“especially after the massacre of
priests and nuns and lay Catholics
slackened, it is demonstrably certain
that by far the greater mass of the
news sent from Spain by the press
associations, and particularly by the
special correspondents of the larger
daily newspapers, has come from Ma
drid, from Valencia and from Barce
lona and the Basque country.” Mr.
Williams does not lay the blame en
tirely on the press. I agree with him,
when he states that censorship re
strictions set up by General Franco
and lack of reliable communications
in White Spain are partial explana
tions of what the American secular
press seems to concentrate on news
from Red Spain. The main sources
of news in Madrid and Valencia, it
seems to me. are directed by Russian
propaganda experts. Mr. Williams ob
serves that “the Franco groups are
on the other side in their understand
ing of the value of public opinion,
and of the ways in which it may be
reached and influenced.”
The American public, I submit, is
being deceived and led astray on one
of the most vital problems in the
world.
The truth of the whole matter was
grudgingly hinted at by the Reuter
News on Monday night, May 3rd:
“Perhaps after all there has been no
bombing. It is quite possible that all
the damage has been done by the re
treating Red Army which is using wo
men and children as a screen for its
escape.”
This is only one more instance of
what I do not hesitate to call the un
fairness of the American Press in gen
eral in the whole matter of the Span
ish conflict. The news seems to be dis
torted at its very source. It is by no
means unknown that Communists
should stoop to lying and deceit. This
has been their history wherever they
have been able to exert influence.
Mr. Michael Williams, a convert to
the Catholic faith, and now editor of
“The Commonweal” in an open letter
appearing in the May 7th issue of that
publication and addressed to ‘‘The Di
rectors, Stockholders, Editors and
Writers of the American Press” urged
the need for directors and editors to
print the news of all sides of the
Spanish Civil War. Copies of this open
letter were sent to several hundred
gentlemen occupying executive or di
recting posts with the news agencies
and papers of this country.
To return to your editorial of this
morning. Like many other good and
kind people you have evidently be
lieved the outrageously false story of
the massacre of innocent people in
Guernica. I am writing to you, not
as a partisan, but in the interest of
truth, decency and plain ordinary
American fair play, to express my
keen disappointment with the “Sa
vannah Morning News” over the
wording and the tone of this morn
ing’s editorial. I should hate to think
that any newspaper man of this city
would willingly place himself in the
category of what Mr. Michael Wil
liams calls “the unconscious propa
gandists” for the “Loyalist” govern
ment, which is plainly and obviously
a “Red” government.
The mass slaughter of innocents in
Guernica never took place.
“Finally, then, I went to the
brethren of my own Congregation,
the men whom I had most derided
and betrayed. And here I found a
charity and forgiveness that sudden
ly and completely broke away the
veil of blindness that I had been try
ing to keep before my eyes, and de
stroyed the mantle of bitterness that
had been cloaking my heart. Not
word of condemnation, but only in
the eyes of my closest friends a look
of dumb and hurt wonder that made
me recall the words of Christ, ‘If an
enemy had done this, I might have
borne with it, but you, my friend and
my familiar.’ Then and only then did
the truth suddenly flash upon me
that in my silly attempt to vindicate
Mr. Williams states as follows: “It
is largely because of this glaring fail
ure or inability of the news associa
tions and the news gathering depart
ments of the daily papers adequately
to report both sides 'of the conflict
in Spain, that the editorial writers,
magazine writers, commentators, lec
turers, radio speakers and ‘liberal’
Protestant clergymen are failing in
their efforts to ‘interpret’ the true
meaning and the probable effects of
the tremendous struggle now going on
in that ravaged land—a struggle in
I feel sure that you will be willing
and anxious to correct the wrong im
pression that has been created. I do
not ask you to make a single move
before investigating, independently of
what I have written, the truth of the
statements that I have made above.
With sentiments of deepest esteem
and with kindest personal regards, 1
remain,
Very sincerely yours,
GERALD P. O’HARA,
Bishop of Savannah-Atlanta.
May 17, 1937.
myself 1 had succeeded not only in
ruining myself, but in bringing shame
and hurt, as cruel as they were un
deserved, to my brothers in the
priesthood and to the Church at
large. Frantically then I tried to stop
a second publication of my article,
but it was too late—-
The moving finger writes, and hav
ing writ.
Moves on, nor all your piety and wit
Can make the moving finger turn
again.
Nor, turning, change a single word of
it
“Only the publication of this arti
cle can bring me any measure of
peace. I hope that it will give to
those who read my earlier distorted
description of the ‘money evil’ in the
Church a picture of the situation in
its true focus.”
In an editor’s note, the Savannah
Morning News states that the news
papers are constantly striving to get
the unbiased facts about the situation
in Spain and have sent many of its most
competent representatives there in an
effort to eliminate “the propagandist
element which so often creeps into
censored dispatches from Europe.
“Despite the exercise of all reason
able precautions, it must be admitted
that biased and prejudiced news re
ports and editorials sometimes creep
into the newspapers of America.
There is, therefore, sound basis for the
contention of the Most Rev. Gerald P.
O’Hara, Bishop of Savannah-Atlanta,
that the news of the Spanish conflict
‘seems to be distorted at its very
source.’ His references to a recent ed
itorial in the Morning News are evi
dently actuated by a commendable
desire to correct any false impressions
that may have been created through
the publication of what a member of
the British Parliament described as
are well taken and are accepted in the
‘massacre and terrorism’ in the siege
of Guernica. Bishop O’Hara’s points
are welcomed in the same friendly
manner in which they are given. The
Morning News, like other newspapers
striving for accuracy and fairness
concerning the situation in Spain,
necessarily places much dependency
upon reliable press associations and
well trained correspondents for
truthful reports, realizing at the same
time that most of the news reports
from the scenes of conflict in Spain
should be accepted wit hthe prover
bial grain of salt.”