The Georgia bulletin (Atlanta) 1963-current, June 20, 1963, Image 4

Georgia Historic Newspapers

The Georgia bulletin, June 20, 1963, Image 4

About The Georgia bulletin (Atlanta) 1963-current | View Entire Issue (June 20, 1963)

Page of 8

Prev Issue Next Issue

Text PDF JP2 (11.0 MB) Clip/Print Image

Page of 8

Prev Issue Next Issue

Return to Top

Newspaper Page TextPAGE 4 GEORGIA BULLETIN THURSDAY, JUNE 20, 1963 the Archdiocese of Atlanta rvunni iiw T ■ ■ w?nr 1 In Hit F ImtaMim Jo U RjMumi I Min SftVING GEORGIA'S 71 NORTHERN COUNTIES Official Organ of the Archdiocese of Atlanta Published Every Week at the Decatur Dekalb News PUBLISHER - Archbishop Paul J. Hallinan MANAGING EDITOR Gerard E. Sherry CONSULTING EDITOR Rev. R. Donald Kieman ADVERTISING DIRECTOR Sue Spence Member of the Catholic Press Association nd Subscriber to N.C.W.C. News Service Telephone 231-1281 | U.S.A. $5.00 Canada $5.50 Foreign $6.50 Second Class Permit at Decatur, Georgia 2699 Peachtree N.E P.O. Box 11667 Norths ide Station Atlanta 5, Ga. ivierr © School HAIL TO OUR AID TO EDUCATION LIFE GIVING WATERS Spirit Of God Stirring We have not yet seen the full text of the Supreme Court*s de cision prohibiting the public school use of Bible reading and the Lord's Prayer. On the face of things the decision is indeed hard to accept; a temporary victory seemingly for those who seek to exclude God from our educational system. While awaiting the full text and the comments of the experts, however, may we hazard a few positive words of hope. Prayer and Bible study, it seems, is by no means ruled out; merely the imposition of any one formula of prayer or study-a formula that might seem to favor one re ligious body at the expense of another. Well, why not pray with out any one set formula? Why not have a minute of silence in which children are instructed to place themselves in the presence of God, praying to Him in what ever words their parents and their church have taught them to pray. We realize that there is much to be said on the other side-- that God should be given col lective, open worship; that many students will not know what to do in a minute of silence and so will not pray at all; that the denial of public prayer tends to deny the legitimate place of God T raffic The Catholic press of this country is always striving to bring greater safety to the Uni ted States. With schools closed across the land, placing more children on the streets more hours of the day, and with the vacation season sharply increasing traffic every where, we urge our readers to take an active part in community safety campaigns. In a resolution adopted last year, the CPA pointed to “the alarming highway traffic acci dent toll,” and said the speci fic contribution of the Catholic press, “should be to emphasize the moral responsibility of both driver and pedestrian.” Prayers in society. Let us therefore explore what ever means are possible to obey the Supreme Court’s decision according to the mind of our Founding Fathers. They, certainly, wanted God to be worshipped from the heart, and it was partly their concern for genuine, sincere worship that prompted then to forbid the esta blishment of any one religion. So now that we are denied the use of any one formula of prayer or Bible reading in our public school system, can we not take advantage of this situation to deepen the reality and sincerity of the prayer that each student will now have to make to him self, either in the whispered fellowship of his fellow religion ists or else in the silence and depth of his own heart? But the decision of the Supreme Court has shattered the com placency of many religious- minded persons in the country. If our public schools are to become godless through legal fiat, then the importance of private religious schools will be self-evident. This is one more reason why parochial schools must continue to be supported, no matter what the sacrifice, financial or otherwise. Safety justice and Christian love we appeal to our fellow American citizen to join in a crusade to keep our highways safe.” Vatican City radio once commented that no amount of traffic regulations can assure ordered traffic unless drivers become conscious of their moral responsibility. The commentator called it a ‘'particularly serious moral problem,” and listed as the principal causes of traffic fat alities: violation of traffic laws, imprudence, usually in the form of speeding, neglect in keeping one s car in good mechanical con dition and irresponsibility. BY REV. LEONARD F.X. MAYHEW In the opening lines of the book of Genesis, as the account of creation is about to unfold, there is a mysterious reference to the Spirit of God stirr ing above the life-giving waters of the new-born world. The account of Pentecost parallels the narrative of creation. In the Acts of the Apostles we hear the roaring of a violent wind as the Holy Spirit hovers in tongues of flame over the new-born Church. The new creation, the renewal of the earth, is accomplished under the creative power and sanctity of the Holy Spirit. The flames that crowned the Apostles are perfect sym bols of the energy and power embodied in creation. We are able to appreciate better than any previous age the apt symbolism of the Pente costal flames. Creation, even the pedestal of inanimate matter upon which we stand, is not the stable, quiescent passivity it ap pears. We live in the age of nuclear power. We have seen the terrifying energy unleashed by the fission of the smallest particle of matter. This energy is encased in all matter. It was fused into it by the Creator to effect the cohesion of the material world. The destructive energy of the Bomb is only the reverse side of the creative energy that seethes within the world and makes it cling together. Creation must have been an ex plosion in reverse. ON THE first Pentecost a new energy explod ed into the world, a new creation inundated the apparent permanence of temporal man and his time-bound world. The tongues of fire rose above the Apostles' within them. Carried along on the wave of this creative power inside them, the Apostles cast themselves out from the shelter of their safe upper room into the waiting world, speaking the tongues of every nation, ready to embrace all mankind into Christ. The dynamism of that creative grace of Pentecost is the unfail ing sustinence of the Church and of Christians. In ever-widening circles it continues to create new men out of old, temples of the Holy Spirit out of the fleshly sons of Adam. Within each one of them it strives to create a free, personal, LITURGICAL WEEK creative dedication which will bring to bear, not by coercion but by choice, all of their energies in the task of "renewing the face of the earth". Too seldom, in our somewhat one-sided preoccu pation with the institutional aspect of Christi anity and the problem of our own individual sal vation, do we attend to the creative responsibility inherent in being a Christian. THE TRULY typical developments of our own day within the Church are examples of this Pentecostal energy. The emphasis on the inviol able freedom of each person, on the active re sponsibility of all the faithful, on diversity in true unity, on openness to the "others", the "new Pentecost" of Pope John - all this is proof twice positive of the abiding presence of the Creator Spirit. The absorption of this creative, personal aspect of the Christian religion is one of the most marked effects of the growth of liturgical devo tion. This is but one of many paradoxes: that from the apparently rigid objectivity of formal worship there should rise most surely the truly free and creative grace that can embrace and transform the drab details of "real" life and make them productive of life eternal. Creation and Pentecost are mysteries of creative freedom, the liberty of love that casts out fear and selfish ness. The liturgy is able to elicit this kind of free response precisely because it avoids what is sub jective and concentrates our attention on the rea lities of supernatural life. Liberty is not an in determinate, unattached state floating between possible choices. It only truly exists in an all- absorbing dedication and total commitment to an ennobling purpose. This kind of creative dedica tion was the heart of the Apostles' courage on Pentecost. It continues in the constant self- renewal of the Church until the end of time. Inviting each of us insistently, it is likewise the grace proffered us to seal with our own personal assent the Pentecostal renewal of the world in Christ. "And though the last lights off the black west "Oh, morning, at the brown brink east ward, springs - because the Holy Ghost over the bent World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings." (G# M Hopkins) This serves to recall that Ca tholic interest in traffic safety has been long practical and con tinuing . Difference Between Christian, Unbeliever One of the strongest manifes tations of this interest was given in 1957, when the Bishops-of the U, S. called upon their fellow American citizens “to join in a crusade to keep our highways safe,” They urged, “with the ut most seriousness “that every driver “reflect upon the moral obligations he assumes” when he takes the wheel of a car. They declared that “careless ness, neglect, or reckless con duct” by a driver is “sinful,” “The distinctive mark of the follower of Christ,” the Bishop’ statement said, “in his love of his fellowman. The mark of the his strict regard for the rights of others. On the basis of both BY FR. ROBERT W. HOVDA Priest of the Pittsburgh Oratory) JUNE 23, THIRD SUNDAY AFTER PENTE COST. The difference between the Christian and the unbeliever is not essentially a matter of sin or of nobility of life (although, for the unbeliev er, "sin" will be a departure from community norms or some kind of psychological impera tive, rather than a failure to respond to a trans cendent call and love . Today’s Mass in all its texts, not only in its Gospel reassurance for the sinner, makes it clear that what distinguishes a Christian is not nobility or sinlessness but faith, openess to God, trust and confidence In God. God's love, His pow er to rescue us, His perfect fathoming of our grief and misery (Entrance, Gradual, Offer tory Hymns), together with His firm, sure judg ment (Alleluia) —these are the realities which save the Christian from either presumption or despair. MONDAY, JUNE 24, BIRTHDAY OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST. Most of the days we dedicate to the memory and imitation of holy men and women have Mass texts which celebrate their faith, their response to grace, their God-centeredness of life. TUESDAY, JUNE 25, ST. WILLIAM, ABBOT. The Mass of an abbot emphasizes the earthly and heavenly rewards which God offers to the "just man." Old Testament Hymns and First Reading speak of the strength and power of holi ness both for this and future generations. That one can "utter wisdom" is reward enough (En trance Hymn). But long life and prosperity, too, were regarded then as signs of divine blessing. The New Testament (Gospel) shifts the empha sis to an eschatological level, to the "long view" of final fulfillment in which justice is vindicat ed. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26, SS. JOHN & PAUL, MARTYRS. "The very hairs of your head are all numbered " (Gospel). This is part of the Christian's eschatological hope, his hope in that final rectification and attainment of glory. It is certainly not his present experience, for, despite great progress, the human person is still too of ten reviled, cheapened, counted expendable, as the martyrs were. But this same suffering and the faith that illumined it with hope made John and Paul "true brothers" (Collect) —as faith and our ultimate direction make us all true brothers. THURSDAY, JUNE 27, MASS AS ON SUNDAY. Catholic public worship is suffused with a heal thy consciousness of sin—healthy, because it is free of any false pride or any rejection of self. "See, my God, the depth of my misery and grief, and forgive me all my sins" (Entrance Hymn). God sees without rejecting. We must see with out rejecting. God loves us. We must love our selves. So every liturgical confession of sin is accompanied by an assurance or pronouncement of pardon, of absolution, of forgiveness. FRIDAY, JUNE 28, VIGIL OF SS. PETER & % Continued on Page 5 Today we recognize the hand of God in John's preconscious existence: in conception, in the womb, in his birth, in his nam ing. The hand of God at the roots of the life of the prophet who was to announce the com ing and presence of the Word heightens every Christian's consciousness of providence, for each of us has a mission to an nounce the Word. SCHOOL PRAYER Court Ruling Not Fatal BY GERARD E. SHERRY The Supreme Court's ruling Monday that recita tion of the Lord’s Prayer and Bible reading in public schools were unconstitutional was not un expected. We hope, too, that the previous hys teria which prevailed when the Court struck down the eleven-year-old practice of official prayers in New York public schools will not be repeated. The New York rul ing (Engel versus Vi tale) is almost a year old. The Court objec ted to the New York State Board of Re gents decreeing an official prayer for public school reci tation. School districts were free to adopt the official prayer or not. Those puplis who did not wish to participate were excused. The prayer, in case you have forgotten, wentlikethis: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we pray thy blessing upon us, our parents, and our country." Immediately after last Year’s ruling, the Court was attacked as outlawing all religious expres sion in public schools. Even leading churchmen of all faiths fell into the trap of commenting be fore reading the ruling, and a lot of unnecessary civic tension was generated. This time we are better conditioned to accept the adverse ruling because when the arguments were raised earlier in the year the line of questioning by the High Court Justices intimated that their sympathies lay (although obviously on legal grounds) with the objectors to Baltimore's Lord’s Prayer recitation and Pennsylvania's Abingdon Township Bible read ing instruction. Writing in Teachers’ College Record, published at Columbia University, William B. Ball put his finger on the crux of the issue in a rather illu minating article published in February of this year. He said: "What may now be seen from the decisions of the Court in the religion-in- education cases? First and most obvious have been the rulings of the Court banishing official religious from the public schools. But each of these rulings have been based upon factual situa tions involving theistic religion. If these decis ions are correct, then as a matter of logic, jus tice, and constitutionality, this banishment must be extended to all religions. This at least is one possible course of action, and its obvious effect upon the public schools would be one of virtual suffocation. This extension is therefore undesir able in a society some of whose members frank ly desire secular humanistic values to be impart ed to their children. These parents should have the right to send their children to schools which ac cord with their conscientious choice. This right is meaningful only where it may be exercised without encountering an economic barrier caused by a refusal of state funds in support of such schools. Prevalent revisionist interpretations of the No Establishment clause, however, dictate such refusal. Extremist views of the "wall of separation’ thus come full circle. "Extension should not, however, dictate the course to be followed by a free and pluralistic society. Democracy must be seen, not a^the imposition of a sort of official intergroup Kul- tur, but rather as a means whereby the most fundamental aspirations of the people are enabled to achieve realization. Then it will be concluded to be sound policy that government give economic aid to education secular essentials in all schools, even though those schools also include elements which accord with the given philosophical or re ligious preferences of particular parents." Bill Ball, one of the few competent lay spokes men in this field, also warned, "We are now in deed brought to the question not of whether re ligion shall be excluded, but of which religions shall be. The answer suggests itself at once. None can be, or all must be. And while the Court has succeeded by its recent decisions in vindicating the rights of the non-theistic, it has in these very decisions given clear standing to those who may now come before it to urge the equal pro tection of God." The latest Supreme Court ruling does not ban religion from public life. It simply reiterates, in a strictly legal sense, that government, be it local or federal, has no right to officially sponsor religious practices in our nation's public schools. The Court is composed of honorable men, and we must presume that they acted in good faith. We can disagree with the ruling of the majority just as did the lone dissenter, Mr. Justice Stewart. However, no purpose will be served in condemn ing the majority simply because we hold an op posing view. Until the Courts rule otherwise, or Congress takes action to nullify the Court’s de cision, we would be better to strengthen our own belief in God and that of our children. We should also thank God that we have our Catholic school system, which is based primarily on the educa tion of the soul. Our parochial school system is not supported by the government and the Con- •stitution still protects our rights to choose where we will have our children educated. The financial burden imposed on Catholic parents is a crush ing one, but it is made all the more worthwhile when we see God being slowly driven from the public school campus. The secularists will no doubt be rubbing their hands with glee at this latest ruling of the Su preme Court. But the God-fearing among us need not despair. The public school system is by and large composed of men and women as equally God-fearing as the rest of us. We can look to them to thwart any attempt at a secularist take-over. We can take a little comfort in the tact, as Bill Ballpoints out, that under the Supreme Court in terpretation secularism is also a "religion", and can have no government support. REAPINGS AT RANDOM