Newspaper Page Text
FOUR
THE BULLETIN OF THE CATHOLIC LAYMEN’S ASSOCIATION OF GEORGIA
JUNE 25, 1955.
lullelttt
The Official Organ of the Catholic Laymen’s
Association of Georgia, Incorporated
JOHN MARKWALTER, Editor
416 Eighth Street, Augusta, Ga.
" ASSOCIATION OFFICERS FOR 1954-1955
J. P. MEYER, Columbus President
E. M. HEAGARTY, Waycross Honorary Vice-President
MRS. L. E. MOCK, Albany Vice-President
DAMON J. SWANN, Atlanta - V. P., Publicity
GEORGE GINGELL, Columbus _ V. P., Activities
RAWSON HAVERTY, Atlanta V. P., Membership
JOHN M. BRENNAN, Savannah Secretary
JOHN T. BUCKLEY, Augusta Treasurer
JOHN MARKWALTER, Augusta Executive Secretary
MISS CECILE FERRY, Augusta Financial Secretary
ALVIN M. McAULIFFE, Augusta Auditor
Vol. XXXVI Saturday, June 25, 1955 No. 2
Entered as seeond class matter at the Post Office, Monroe, Georgia,
and accepted for mailing at special rate of postage provided by para
graph (e) of section 34.40, Postal Laws and Regulations.
Member of N. C. W. C. News Service, the Catholic Press As
sociation of the United States, the Georgia Press Association,
and the National Editorial Association.
Publisned fortnightly by the Catholic Laymen’s Association of Geor
gia, Inc., with the Approbation of the Most Reverend Archbishop-
Bishop of Savannah-Atlanta, and Of the Right Reverend Abbot
Ordinary of Belmont.
Terror In South America
(By Rev, John D. Toomey)
Ever since Little Eva died, Juan Peron has run an un
steady and insatiable course. Long regarded as a dictator, but
more as a spoiled puppy barking at the big American bulldog
as he often chose to look at us, he did not give full signs of
his diabolic wickedness until recently.
Several months ago he began a campaign for “separation
of church and state”—a well-sounding phrase to democratic
Americans. But we soon found that what he meant was sup
pression of Church and complete domination by the State.
If there had been a cordial separation, as we know it, soldiers
would not have arrested the clergy when they spoke their
minds in sermons, nor dragged Catholics from the Cathedral
and Cardinal’s residence, nor expelled nuns from their schools
and hospitals, nor deposed two prelates from their legitimate
ecclesiastical offices.
Is this “separation” or is it a reawakening of Hitlerism
and Stalinism at their worst? Despite our abhorence of
bloodshed, it is heartening to see that the Argentine people
have risen in protest against this tyranny. The day will come
when Peron will lie in dust beside Evita, but the Church will
live on stronger than ever. In the meantime, devout people
are suffering because of his evil. Let us pray for them and
pray also that God may touch the hearts of those who are
responsible for this reign of terror.
Fifty Golden Years
(By Rev. John D. Toomey)
Fifty years ago, a young man completed his studies for
the priesthood at All Hallows Seminary in Ireland.. He was
ordained by his bishop and thus began his priestly career,
half of which has been spent in the Diocese of Savannah-
Atlanta. Part of this career was devoted to service in Aus
tralia and also as a chaplain with the Australian forces dur
ing the First World War. For his courage under fire he was
decorated by the King of England.
We know Father John J. Kennedy for the zealous work
for souls which he has done in this diocese. We remember
him especially for the inspiration he gave to the young, men
of Augusta some twenty years ago. We know of his influence
in the university circles of Athens and his long and constant
devotion to his priestly duties in Valdosta. And more recent
ly we have noted the vigor and enthusiasm, with which he
has embarked on the building of New St. Mary’s-on-the-Hill
in Augusta. Indeed the years are golden in their fruition of
priestly labor and Christlike example.
We congratulate Father Kennedy on his fiftieth anni
versary. We pray that God will grant him many more years
among us.
The Extension Society
His Excellency Archbishop William- D. O’Brien, Director
of the Catholic Church Extension Society, was the presiding
prelate at the dedication of the Chapel of St. Anne at Rich
mond Hill.
Few Dioceses in the United States are more indebted to
the Catholic Church Extension Society and the Archbishop
than our own. Our diocese, is dotted with mission chapels
which were made possible in large measure by donations
from the Society and by the personal interest which Arch
bishop O’Brien has manifested so often and in so many ways
in the progress of the Church in Georgia.
That Archbishop O’Brien found it possible to dedicate
Georgia’s newest Mission Chapel is a great honor. May Al
mighty God continue to shower blessings upon the Catholic
Church Extension Society and its vital work.
Still A Question
THIS WORLD OF OURS
(By Richard Paltee)
For a couple of years past
I have lived under the illusion
that the so-called Protestant
question in Spain was a dead
issue. I am mistaken. I noted
in a' leading
Washing
ton bookshop,
only last week a
large display of
a new volume
called “The Op
pression of pro-
testants in
Spain” by a
French minister,
Jacques Delpech, and with a
preface by John A. Mackay.
The writer of the preface is an
old hand at beating the anti-
Catholic drums and the Beacon
Press, which publishes this little
work, is equally noted for its
sponsorship of the Blanshard
nonsense. I am not going to
analyze the book itself, which
produces absolutely nothing new,
but I am going to suggest a few
of the most outrageous state
ments from the pen of Dr.
Mackay-—about as bad history
and misinterpretation as I have
found anywhere.
His preface is a sort of attempt
to interpret the broad currents
of Spanish history to show two
things: that Protestantism has
always flourished secretly in the
land, and that today the Protes
tant minority of 20,000 (his own
figures) represents the vanguard
of the defenders of liberty in
what the Princeton Theological
Seminary president calls this
“tyranny.”
Aside from bad history, Mr.
Mackay indulges in one of the
most un-intellectual and hys
terical outbursts I have found in
years. His introduction is filled
with expressions like “tragic si
tuation,” “sadistic cruelty,” ty
rannical rule,” “unholy wedlock
between a totalitarian church
and a totalitarian state.” Ob
viously Mr. Mackay is the vic
tim of sheer emotion, and with
that I am not going to quarrel.
THE SAME EVERYWHERE
Mr. Mackay suggests that
Catholics — he speaks only Of a
strange group called “Liberal
Catholics”—are ashamed of what
is happening to Protestants in
Spain. Personally I most certain
ly do not come under this defi
nition of Catholic, so I can
speak only for myself. I have
contended in this column, and in
many other places, that there
are undoubtedly certain prob
lems with reference to the 20,000
minority in Spain; and that some
arrangements, as they exist, are
probably vexing to the tiny
group of Spanish Protestants.
This is true of extremely small
religious groups everywhere.
How about Reformed Jews in
Israel? Or Christians for that
matter? How about Catholics in
Sweden? What of Christian mis
sionaries in India? The Jehovah’s
Witnesses, I dare say, consider
themselves as living in the ca
tacombs in some parts of the
world,
But it is Mr. Mackay’s history
that appalls me. Protestantism,
open or disguised, is attributed to
any number of great Spaniards,
not excluding Saint John of the
Cross and Saint Teresa of Avi
la. (I would like to see a detail
ed defense of the absured thesis
that Saint Teresa was a sort of
devotee of Luther in disguise.)
Unamuno is chalked up as a kind
of evangelical fellow traveller.
He was certainly no Catholic;
and if anything pleased Unamu
no less than Catholicism, it was
Protestantism — as his whole
work atests.
The analysis of the Spanish
Republic is simply distortion of
everything known of the period.
.The vicious destruction of con
vents and murder of priests and
nuns after May, 1931 is stated
as the result of the condemnation
of the Republic by the Cardinal
Primate. The Cardinal Primate,
who was .then none other than
the present Cardinal-Archbishop
of Seville, stated—and I quote
him textually: “It is the duty
of Catholics to accept the duly
constituted government. The ob
ligation of Catholics under the
Republic is to send representa
tives to the chambers who will
defend the interests of the
Church.”
El Debate, the great Catholic
daily, took this same position.
And Gil Robles organized a po
litical party entirely within the
framework of the Republic so
that Catholics might operate un
der its institutions. Mr. Mackay
tells us that “the Spanish Re
public was born at the ballot
booths and not out of violent re
volution.” I wonder if he could
cite any Spanish election in
which, the issue of monrachy
versus republic was ever pre
sented to the Spanish people. In
1931 the Spanish did not vote
for a Republic. In an election
for municipal seats, the Repub
licans got 5875 as against 22,150
for the monarchists. Can this by
any standard be called an over
whelming vote for the republic?
Mr. Mackay, like all of his
ilk, considers the Spanish Church
a dark and somber institution,
defying modernism, progress and
human welfare. A left-wing
author, quite unsuspect of any
Catholic sympathy, Gerald Bren-
na, in his “Spanish Labyrinth”
calls attention, among other
things, to the fact that the close
association of Church and State
in Spain produced a high degree
of social consciousness and ad
vanced thinking that seems to us
even today quite revolutionary.
I quote: “Its close connection
with the State had given it an
interest in social and political
questions such as the Church in
other Christian counties had
never possessed.” The Church
performed, in the words of this
writer, “an immense part in
furthering the moral idea of the
more just distribution of proper
ty.”
It is a pity that, as the years
go by, we are still fed this pap
that distorts and misinterprets
an event about which it is quite
possible to ascertain the reali
ties.
THE BACKDROP
r g||||%||gB -
mmrnmm
By CHARLES LUCEY
NO SPOT FOR NEUTRALISM
Gi
I take my stand with that
comment made the other day by
Congressman Donald M. Jackson
of California.
“There is no spot for neutra
lism in a conflict which is basic
ally between human freedom
and human slavery,” he seaid.
“I believe that Mr, Nehru is
playing an extremely dangerous
game in attempting to pacify
Chou En-lai and the Chinese
Communists.”
Mr. Jackson spoke as a mem
ber of the House Foreign Af
fairs Committee weighing a new
appropriation of $15 million for
technical aid to India. He reflect
ed the misgivings of many in
Congress when it comes to pro
viding more American dollars for
our neutralist friends Tito and
Nehru.
NEVER-NEVER LAND
The U.S. has gvien the Indian
prime minister’s government
several hundred millions in re
cent years. The $15 million pro
posed now is minor in relation
to the billions given in foreign
aid by this country since World
War II. It should be granted to
this new nation which has urgent
need for technical help to im
prove the lot of its masses.
But when does Pandit Nehru
emerge from this nevter-never
land—a “dreamy half-world of
co-existence with Communism”
it has been called—in which he
professes to see no difference
between the two great contesting
forces in the world today?
NONE SO BLIND . . .
There was a time when equat
ing capitalism with imperialism
made sense. There wgs a time
when the free enterprise system,
for all the elbow room it gave
the rugged individuals, meant
piracy and exploitation and op
pression of workers. It can still
stand a lot of cleaning up. You
can cut through a veneer of cul
ture pretty fast in a world, of
jukeboxes, neon signs and mass
circulation of comic books. But
what the California congressman
said still goes—it ought to be
easy enough to distinguish
basically between human free
dom and human slavery.
We in America do live in a
world which knows freedom of
speech and of press and of as
sembly. Catholics worship freely
in their churches and so do all
other creeds. The crushing bru
tality of the police state is un
known here. But for years now
Mr. Nehru has been unable or
unwilling to see any diference.
FENCE-SITTING
Now and then when he has
had any good words for the U.S.
it has been coupled with equal
praise of Moscow. Sometimes he
has been plainly hostile to us.
He has been critical of Amer
ican attempts to store up anti
communist forces in the Far
East, in apparent refusal to rec
ognize that if there is no resis
tance then one day inevitably
the Reds will push on from Chi
na to sweep all before them.
On February 10, 1945 Mr. Neh
ru noted that cerain countries
had accused India of sitting on
the fence.
“Well, if we find it comfort
able to sit on the fence we will
continue to sit on the fence,” he
said. “It is not anybody’s busi
ness to order us about. Anyhow,
we are not going to be ordered
about.”
Nehru has been critical of the
(Continued on Page Five)