Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 4 — The Southern Cross, October 12,1972
The Southern Cross
Business Office 225 Abercorn St. Savannah, Ga. 31401
Most Rev. Gerard L. Frey, D.D. President
Rev. Francis J. Donohue, Editor • John E. Markwalter, Managing Editor
Second Class Postage Paid at Waynesboro, Ga. 30830
Send Change of Address to P.O. Box 10027, Savannah, Ga. 31402
Published weekly except the second and last weeks
in June, July and August and the last week in December.
At 202 E. Sixth St., Waynesboro, Ga. 30830
Subscription Price $2.76 per year by Assement Parishes Diocese of Savannah Others $5 Per Year
“Yes” on Amendment 10
There are 27 hospitals in Georgia
chartered under State law as
not-for-profit organizations for the
purpose of providing health care for the
people of Georgia.
People from every county in the State
presently use these hospitals.
They are operated by religious
fraternal and other organizations, such as
Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, Seventh
Day Adventist, Shriners, Elks and others.
The hospitals have always been
exempt from payment of ad valorem
taxes on properties directly essential to
the hospital operation. Similar hospitals
are exempt in all other 49 states.
However, some Georgia cities and
counties, in their search for
much-needed revenues, have raised a
question concerning continued tax
exemption for these non-profit hospitals,
claiming the State Constitution does not
specifically exempt such hospitals,
although the General Assembly and local
governments have traditionally
recognized these hospitals as exempt
since the institutions were first
established.
If these cities and counties were to be
successful in their attempt to impose ad
valorem taxes on not-for-profit hospitals,
it would mean increases in hospital
charges to patients of from two to four
dollars per pr tient day, depending on
local tax conditions.
In other words, it is the sick who
would have to pay the tax and hospital
bills, already so onerous, would rise even
higher.
To counter this possibility, the
General Assembly has approved a
Constitutional Amendment which will
be on the ballot in the November 7
general election.
It is Amendment No. 10. We
recommend a “yes” vote on this
amendment.
Point, Counterpoint!
Father John McLaughlin, S.J. is a
speech writer for President Nixon and is
officially designated as a deputy special
assistant to the President.
He spoke at a Columbus Day banquet
sponsored by Savannah Council No. 631
of the Knights of Columbus last
Saturday evening, giving the Knights and
their guests his insights into the
personality and style of the President
and some predictions concerning the
future of the country if Mr. Nixon is
elected to a second term.
After Father McLaughlin’s speech,
Savannah Mayor-pro-tem Frank Rossiter
was invited to respond on behalf of the
city.
However, before presenting the keys
to the city to the Presidential assistant,
Rossiter, a life-long Democrat managed
to get in a few “licks” for his party, too.
“Thank you,” he said to K. of C.
officials, “for inviting me to this Nixon
Day banquet” and smilingly reminded
Father McLaughlin that the first
presidential candidate to run under the
banner of the Republican party was
John C. Fremont, of Savannah.
“When that gentleman ran,” laughed
Rossiter, “he got the socks beat off
him.”
Returning to the theme of the
banquet, which was the anniversary of
Columbus’ discovery of America,
Rossiter declared that “when the
steamship Savannah made its first
trans-atlantic voyage in 1819, it literally
took the wind out of the sails of every
other vessel on the high seas. But I’ve
never seen the wind taken out of the
sails of Christopher Columbus like I have
here tonight.”
He then presented the presidential
speechwriter with the keys to the city
assuring him that it would “open every
door in this beautiful city of squares,
built on a bluff, with Bull as its main
street.” Exit everyone, laughing.
§ America’s Social
And Economic Inequality
Rev. Andrew M. Greeley
Christopher Jencks is not the only recent
writer to find inequality in the United States
intolerable. That some people should have great
incomes while others are very poor seems to be
self evidently evil. Indeed that the standard of
living in some countries is so much higher than
that of others also seems clearly immoral.
Something ought to be done about it.
There are a number of comments that must
be made:
1) The American income pyramid is
relatively “flat.” The overhwhelming majority
of Americans are neither very rich nor very
poor.
2) I do not believe that the issue is whether
all Americans can be guaranteed decent food,
clothing, housing and health care. A society like
ours should certainly be able to afford such a
guarantee.
3) I do not think, either, that the issue is
governmental and social favoritism to the very
wealthy. While I don’t suppose favoritism can
be completely eliminated, it does seem to me
that there is far too much of it in the United
States both in the form of tax loopholes and
government subsidies which are technically
legal and the “favors” which are extra-legal but
part of the governmental way of life -
particularly when a big business administration
is in power. The ITT and Lockheed cases are
sufficient evidence as to who runs the country
today.
4) If all Jencks is saying is that we should
strive to eliminate misery for the poor and
special favors for the rich (realizing that it will
take time to do both and neither will ever be
done perfectly), I think there can be little
reason to disagree with him. Furthermore, we
need constant reminders that even though both
of these goals have been part of our national
consensus for decades we have been intolerably
lax, and I would add unimaginative, in our
efforts to achieve them.
5) But, I suspect he is saying more. My
position would be that in a society where food,
clothing, housing and health care is guaranteed
for everyone and where favoritism to the
wealthy and powerful was reduced to a
minimum, the residual inequality that persisted
would not necessarily be inherently evil. I think
that egalitarians like Jencks are saying that even
residual inequality would be inherently evil,
that in the ideal and moral world toward which
we ought to be striving there would be no
inequality of income at all, and that while such
equality may not be practically achievable at
once, it should still be the absolutely primary
goal of all social change to which all other goals
will be directed.
6) Hence, the egalitarians will not be shaken
by the economic argument that some inequality
is necessary to guarantee the motivation for
innovation and risk taking which are essential
to economic growth or expansion. They may
question the factual truth of the argument and
suggest that motivations for risk taking need
not be financial at all and for many people
clearly are not. But they are perfectly willing to
concede the truth of the argument for the
present corporate capitalist system; they add
that this merely proves that corporate
capitalism is inherently immoral because it
depends on economic inequality which is
inherently immoral.
7) It would be a mistake to underestimate
the intellectual and moral appeal of the
passionately stated egalitarian position -
particularly with the young and enthusiastic. It
has the merit of simplicity and can generate
almost evangelical fervor. Those who disagree
with it are in a very difficult position both
ethically and intellectually - though as I hope
to show in the next column, I believe those
who reject egalitarianism are probably right.
The Blessed Sacrament
Rev. Armand Nigro, S.J.
Exposition and all day (everyday) adoration
of the Blessed Sacrament in Bishop White
Seminary Chapel is one of Spokane’s special
privileges. I felt the deep peace there today
during the thanksgiving after Mass.
The tensions and conflicts of the past few
days (caused mostly by my own stupid
mistakes and insensitivity) don’t make much
sense to me, but Jesus present here in the
Eucharist makes lots of sense.
Many happenings in Catholic life still confuse
me (others risk and even disgust me), but being
in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament is
reassuring. “I am Lord, not you,” He keeps
reminding me, “and the people in the Church
are mine not yours; and I want to take care of
them. You are invited to help, if you want to -
but don’t try to play God, because you’ll just
cause harm and get frustrated and fall on your
face.”
The politico-socio-economic jungle in which
we live makes less and less sense to me as days
roll on, but Jesus alive and present in His
Eucharist and in us makes more and more
sense. Building the earth and building human
society along secularistic blueprints grow more
bankrupt as men thresh around in their own
sterile self-confidence and raise clouds of dust;
but sharing the concern of Jesus that every
individual is precious and deserves the love and
reverence due to sons and daughters of God,
makes lots of sense - especially since Jesus is
present in the Eucharist to feed His own life
into us.
The funerals of two teenagers and the death
of my uncle this week, together with the illness
of friends and the break up of marriages I have
been trying to help patch up, and the hurt I
have caused some close friends by selfish
decisions, don’t make any sense to me at all;
but Jesus alive in this Chapel and in me makes
all the sense in the world.
God led and fed a motley group of runaway
slaves through desert wastes, pouring His love
into them, taking care of them, fashioning them
into His people, Israel. During these insecure
and wandering days they were reminded of His
presence by a bright cloud (the Shekinah)
which led them, and each day they gathered His
manna (sweet-tasting pellets of bread) from the
desert floor. They even pitched a special tent
for God wherever they camped, and the cloud
settled on it.
We don’t need a cloud to remind us of God’s
presence now, because He breathes His own
Spirit into us and He lives in us, giving us faith
in Jesus, sharing His life with us like a divine
blood-transfusion. And our manna is the real
heaven-bread - the Lord’s Eucharist.
More and more things don’t make sense to
me anymore (if they ever did), but Jesus makes
more sense to me every day and His abiding
presence in us and in the Eucharist is our
guarantee of eternal life and resurrection. A
fantastic promise He gives us: “Whoever eats
my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I
live in him .. .He already has Eternal life and
that is why I will raise him up on the last day.”
(Jn.6) What more could we ask? What more
could he possibly give? In the gift of Himself
we have everything - and that makes lots of
sense.
A Retarded
Boy
Rev. Joseph Dean
C.H. Spurgeon once told of some Christians
who had tried to teach Biblical truths to a
brain-damaged boy. They did the best they
could, but it was tiring work. The child had
little intelligence, and after the believers
had spent long hours instructing him in the
great doctrines of the faith, one of them asked,
“John, have you a soul?” The diligent teacher
and his helpers felt a twinge of disappointment
when the boy replied, “No, I have no soul.”
But their dismay was quickly turned to
rejoicing as the lad went on to say, “I had a
soul once, but I lost it and Jesus Christ found
it, and I always let Him keep it. So it is His and
not mine.”
How wonderful that the simple youngster
had grasped the truth enunciated by the apostle
Paul when he said, “I know whom I have
believed and am persuaded that he is able to
keep that which I have committed unto
him against that day.”
0 that Christians would be wise enough to
stop analyzing their feelings to see if they are
saved, and rest instead upon the assuring Word
of God. It clearly reveals that His undying love
remains steadfast to all who come to Him the
best they know how, seeking His eternal
forgiveness (John 6:37).
Believer, stop your doubting and say with
Solomon of old, “My beloved is mine, and I am
his.” (Song of Solomon 2,16)
Are Vultures
Also Lovely?
Joseph A. Breig
I am relaxing on my patio, pondering the
mystery of the grass and trees, the birds and
insects, the flowers and tomato plants. And the
thought comes that surely the most miserably
mistaken of all men is the rationalist who
accepts only what he can see or touch or taste
or weigh or measure -- who denies or doubts the
existence of realities beyond reach of the
senses.
There was a time not many years ago when
such a man could appeal for some sort of
support to what he called, reverentially,
“science”. But science has abandoned him.
Now the scientists say that everything is
composed of electricity; of electrons and
protons and neutrons, arranged in certain
perceptible forms, but vibrating and spinning at
incredible speeds. And they tell us that what we
call matter is in truth energy of almost
unthinkable power, which can be released to
our destruction or our service.
to us. And He reveals to us
urn which is in God. (I Cor., 2).
Formerly, only the prophets and
philosophers and poets - and the farmers and
woodsmen and little children - realized that all
is mystery. Now they have been joined by the
physicists and microbiologists and the others.
Now we all know - all but the rationalist
clinging to his discredited dogmas - that even
one blade of grass is ultimately a mystery; that
its secrets are so numberless and so complex
that never will they be totally penetrated by
the most tireless researchers.
Among the earliest television programs I
remember watching was an interview with a
world-renowned physicist. The closing question
had to do with, “What is the most baffling
problem confronting the scientist?” The
physicist’s reply was that what most
puzzled him was, what makes things what they
are? Why for example, does a tomato plant
always bear tomatoes and never anything else?
Or, as a philosopher might phrase it, what is
the cause of the “whatness” deep down in
things? G.K. Chesterton, I recall, once
remarked that when all is said and done, the
reason that grass is green is that when God
created it, he pointed to it and commanded,
“Be green!” Today, we might phrase it this
way: “Grass is green because God designed it,
and the human eye and brain, and the human
spirit, so that when they all came together, one
effect would be greenness.”
Resting between chores on my patio,
therefore, I see some sort of solution for the
mystery of the blue of the bluejays as they
mingle with the gray sparrows pecking at the
birdseed we sprinkle on our driveway. But I
think that one of the questions I might ask God
when my time comes is this: “Why on earth is a
voracious scavenger like the bluejay so swiftly
lovely? Shouldn’t a scavenger be ugly, like a
vulture?”
Or are vultures, too, mysteriously beautiful?
Are they ugly tame oqjy because I am not wise
enough to see them quite right?