The Georgia bulletin (Atlanta) 1963-current, October 31, 1963, Image 4

Georgia Historic Newspapers

The Georgia bulletin, October 31, 1963, Image 4

About The Georgia bulletin (Atlanta) 1963-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 31, 1963)

Page of 8

Prev Issue Next Issue

Text PDF JP2 (12.2 MB) Clip/Print Image

Page of 8

Prev Issue Next Issue

Return to Top

Newspaper Page TextPAGE 4 GEORGIA BULLETIN THURSDAY OCTOBER 31, 1963 the Archdiocese of Atlanta GEORGIA SCtVING GEORGIA'S 71 NORTHERN COUNTIES Official Organ of the Archdiocese of Atlanta Published Every Week at the Decatur Dekalb News PUBLISHER - Archbishop Paul I-Hallinan MANAGING EDITOR Gerard E. Sherry CONSULTING EDITOR Rev. R. Donald Kiernan 2699 Peachtree N.E^ P.O. Box 11667 Norths ide Station Atlanta 5, Ga. ^and m Member of the Catholic Press Association nd Subscriber to N.C.W.C. News Service Telephone 231-1281 Second Class Permit at Atlanta, Ga. U.S.A. $5.00 Canada $5.50 Foreign $6.50 No Downgrading The Council Fathers voted two media’s interpretation of the vote days ago that debate on the role is that by downgrading Mary, of the Blessed Virgin should be the Council Fathers are attempt- incorporated as a chapter in the ing to placate our separated bre- Schema “On the Nature Of The Church”. Only forty votes separ ated the Fathers, many of whom felt that it should be debated as a separate Schema. Clarification of the Mother of God’s place in the Church should not be debased by references to an alleged battle between so- called Liberals and Conserva tives within the ranks of The Hierarchy of the Church. The Council debate is above the semantic tangle, and suggestions that one side or the other has won is false. Current discussions among the Council Fathers em phasize that there is no debate or differences on the essentials of Catholic doctrine. The differe nces are solely on how the Coun cil’s objective of “up-dating” the effectiveness of the Church as Christ’s witness on earth, can be best carried out. It is, therefore, deplorable to hear radio network news casts, and to see newspaper headlines, carrying suggestions that Tues day's vote means that the Coun cil Fathers are downgrading the role of the Blessed Virgin. Noth ing is further from the truth. The gist of the secular news Subsidiary We attended a Communion Breakfast last week-end at which the speaker made reference to the principle of Subsidiary Function. It has been mentioned in the So cial Encyclicals of the Popes ever since Leo XIIl's celebrated Re- rum Novarum, often referred to as “The Workers’ Charter”. It was re-emphasized in a very special way by Pope John XXIII in his encyclical Mater Et Ma- gistra. Simply put, this means that the purpose of any social grouping or organization is to help its members, and never to destroy or absorb them. The group exists for the good of the individual; it is not the individual who exists for the good of the group. The Church recognizes that special conditions may demand large groups and organizations in in dustry or society. It emphasizes, however, that just as it is wrong to withdraw from the individual and commit to a group what the “Thou shall not bend! thren. This interpretation is also false. As one Council Father put it: “All Christians could meditate together on what the Bible tells us about the Mother of God, which would help the cause of unity, whereas further elaboration of dogmatic definitions now valid for Catholics might only raise fur ther obstacles to this cause.” We can rest assured that what ever is eventually promulgated on the place of the Blessed Vir gin in the veneration of the faith ful, it will only be to enhance her role and make it more mean ingful. To quote our own belov ed Archbishop Hallinan: “Surely the place of His mot her, Mary, was made clear by Christ Himself at the wedding feast of Cana, and at Calvary by Mary herself, and should be clear to all of us. Because she is the Mother of Christ, she has the claim upon our filial love and our proper veneration ” No! the Blessed Virgin is not being downgraded. GERARD E. SHERRY Function individual’s own enterprise and industry accomplish, so too “It is an injustice, a grave Evil, and a disturbance of the right order for a larger and higher association to take over the fun ctions which can be performed ef ficiently by smaller groups.” (Pope Pius XI in Quadragessi- mo Anno). The principle of Subsidiary Function emphasizes individual property rights, and denies state or federal intervention beyond what is needed for the common good. Some people, however, use this principle to justify their re fusal to allow Negroes to be ser ved on their property; others use it to justify monopolistic tenden cies in business and industry. Yet it is obvious that individual property rights are not absolute. The late lamented Pope John puts it in practical terms in “Mater Et Magistra;” “We should notice at this point that the right of private owner ship is clearly sanctioned by the Gospel. Yet at the same time the Divine Master frequently extends to the rich the insistent invita tion to convert their material goods into spiritual ones by con ferring them on the poor. ‘Lay not up to yourselves treasures on earth; where the rust and moth consume and where thieves break through and steal. But lay up to yourselves treasures in heaven; where neither the rust nor moth doth consume, and where thieves do not break through nor steal.’ And the Lord will look upon the charity given to the poor as given to Himself, ‘Amen, I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me’.” GERARD E. SHERRY Ever Old, Ever New SENATOR’S REPORT Also 6 Out Of Order 9 BY REV. LEONARD F.X, MAYHEW Each week the junior Senator from the state of Georgia records a statement from Washington, D. C. for broadcast over the radio stations of the state. On Saturday, October 19, the Senator’s report concerned the 'situation; in South Viet- Nam. Unfortunately, it appears thatMr. Talmadge did not do his homework carefully enough this time. His report contained a couple of erroneous statements as well as a generally misleading im plication. This column is not, and ought not to be, con cerned directly with political problems. The Senator is entitled to his view of the situation in Viet-Nam, Indeed, as a member of the legislative branch of the American government, he is under an obligation to inform himself about the serious problems in that area that bear on the sec urity pf this country. What he most definitely ought not to do, particularly in view of his pro minence and the authority of his position, is to accept or publi cize misleading and prejudic ial statements without carefully examining their truth. THERE HAS been entirely too much reporting of the civil troubles of Viet Nam that has connected the Catholicism of the Diem family - and through them the Church itself - with their treatment of the protesting Buddhist monks. Senator Talmadge has apparently accepted these accounts without question and has added one or two details of his own. In his report to the poeple of Georgia, Senator Taldmadge lists the positions of authority held by members of the Diem family. "One member of the family is President; the other heads the offi cial state church;. . .", he reports. The second part of this statement apparently refers to the fact that the President's brother is the Catholic bishop of Hue. This position does not, in any sense, make him head of "the official state church." The Catholic Church is not the state church of South Viet-Nam. That is that. To imply that it is, is erroneous and extremely misleading. THE SENATOR, a paragraph later, goes on to state: "one of the grave problems seems to be the persecution of the people by the Diem govern ment, particularly as it relates itself to religion. The overwhelming majority of the people in the area belong to the Buddhist faith, yet the govern ing group belongs to the Catholic faith." These two statements are full of implications that are dubious, to state it mildly. First of all, there is considerable doubt that the root of the conflict in Viet-Nam is religious at all. Several compet ent reporters, among them Father Patrick O' Conor of the N. C. W. C. and Marguerite Hig gins of the N. Y. Herald Tribune, deny that re ligion plays any major role. Secondly, the "over whelming" Buddhist majority shrinks noticeably under examination. The General Buddhist Asso ciation of Viet-Nam in 1962 listed one million inscribed members. Reliable statistics state that three to four million Vietnamese actually prac tice Buddhism, out of a total population of 12 to 13 million. Various forms of Confucianism seems to be the religion of the "overwhelming majority." THE WORST OFFENSE is to label the govern ment of Viet-Nam Catholic. Here are some of the facts. The president is a Catholic; the vice- president is not. There are five Catholic cabinet ministers out of seventeen: three Catholic gene- erals out of nineteen;, a non-Catholic chief of staff. Less than one-half of the provincial chiefs are Catholic. Under the circumstances it s&ems at least inaccurate to speak of a Catholic govern ing group. We might as well speak of a Catholic government in the United States. Inaccurate and misleading statements from government leaders, particularly if they offend the spirit of religious tolerance and fraternity that seems to be on the increase today, ought to be easily and carefully avoided. LITURGICAL WEEK ‘Whose Is This Likeness?’ BY REV. ROBERT W. HOVDA NOVEMBER 3, 22ND SUNDAY AFTER PENTE COST. "Whose is this likeness?" (Gospel) is a question that turns our minds not only to the human person, created in the image and like ness of God, but also to the Church as worsh iping community and to Sunday Mass as an icon of Christ's kingdom. The whole contemplated re form in Catholic public worship is an effort to make this sign, this image, this icon real com munication for the believer and real edification for the unbel ieving witness. So the Church’s liturgy and all the arts the lit urgy employs (architecture, pa inting, sculpture, etc.) should be to answer that question un hesitatingly: "Here we see Christ acting in to day’s world , reconciling men with the Father and with one another." Here Christ speaks a word and does a deed through the members of His Body, a community of men and women joined in faith and love. And the word He speaks and the deed He does are immediately meaningful, significant for all those gathered in common prayer. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4 ST. CHARLES BOR- ROMEO, BISHOP, CONFESSOR. A great teacher and Catholic Reformation figure, Charles appea red at a time when the sign of the Church’s public worship was dim and obscure, as it has been most of the time since then. Had the Euch arist been effectively communicating its message of love and unity—one bishop, one altar, one community—those years could not have left us a legacy of separation and division. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, MASS AS ON SUN DAY. Heaven is described in the Apocalypse as a perfect chorus of praise to God. The Mass, as an image of the Kingdom of heaven, must also be a chorus of praise, a common prayer, a visible demonstration of unity in faith and act ion. Thus it makes us "ready for the day when Jesus Christ comes" (First Reading). WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, MASS AS ON SUNDAY. "The Altar is Christ," the bishop says whenever he consecrates the holy Table. This prime symbol of Christ in the Church must somehow show Christ’s role as the one Media tor between God and man. It must not be far off, a mere object of adoration, but mediating, a table of invitation, the community's banquet table. It is the sign of the Son of God, yes, but of the Son of God who became Man, who enter ed into the human family as our Priest and Bro- GOW1NUED ON PAGE 5 BY V.S. LAYMEN Some Great Expectations One of the great expectations in relation to the Vatican Council concerns the laity’s desire for a clarification of their role in the Mystical Body of Christ. Some maintain that no clarification is necessary — and they have their spokesmen among the Council Fathers. Fortunately, last week’s debate on this particular section of the Schema brought out the fact that many bishops throughout the world feel otherwise. There is no question that the mission of the laity within the Church is different and subor dinate to the work of the hierarchy. But in saying this, it does not follow that the Lay Apostolateis in any way less import ant to Christ's mis sion on earth. When the late Pope John announced there would be a Council, and suggested the topics for discussion, there were some who urged the Fathers of the Council to "emancipate the laity". This was a far-fet ched observation. The laity has been emanci pated since baptism. The difficulty’ has been that too few understood it, especially among the laity itself. The debate in the Council has cleared the air in this respect. NO GREAT surprises can be expected when Pope Paul approves and promulgates the decis ions of the Council Fathers. Those lay men and women who have been "straining at the leash," waiting for the signal to "do something" are going to be greatly disappointed. One obvious reason is that the mandate for lay action has always been there. The Council Fathers can only reiterate it, and suggest more fruitful ways of lay collaboration with the hierarchy, under the swiftly changing conditions of the space age. I am always suspicious of those people who have to wait for official approval to be fully Catholic. There are many spheres of life where such approval is unnecessary. Just a simple realiza tion of our baptismal vows should be sufficient impetus in the home, the parish, and the civic community. THERE IS one area of lay-hierarchy relations which I do hope the Council will give some ser ious thought — that is in the area of communi cation (or dialogue if you like) between the people and their bishop. Several Council Fathers brought up this question, and it deserves attention. As one bishop put it, "The channel of communication between the bishop and the laity is non-exis tent in some dioceses, and lay opinions are seldom requested or considered necessary.’’ This naturally leads to increased tension with in the Mysncal Body, and creates among many of the laity a feeling of being unwanted. Bishop Philip Hannan, Auxiliary of Washington, D. C., touched on this when he told his fellow Council Fathers, "The laity should be urged to join or ganizations which can influence daily life- asso ciations of parents interested in educational act ivities, and organizations with professional, char itable, and civic aims, not excluding participat ion in politics. Men cannot be led to Christ unless associations cof this kind are marked with the spirit of Christ. The Bishops should set up special organizations to elicit the opinions of the laity. . ." OBVIOUSLY, the laymen’s role centers on the world, where he makes his living, and carries on his profession or trade. It is here, there fore, that the witness for Christ has to be made. There is nothing new about it. The New Testa ment is replete with exhortations to lay action; and their accomplishment. As one French bishop put it to his confreres in Council debate, "Catholic action is not a modern invention. There are many episodes in the Gospel which are examples of true Catholic action,." SEVERAL Council Fathers have also compla ined that the Schema affecting the laity makes too much strees on the confirmation of authority within the Church at the expense of the rights of the laity. It is gratifying to note the number of bishops at the Council who have made it clear that the laity have many rights within the Church which need public affirmation. In other words, while the perennial gripers among the laity omplain that we are merely "second- class citizens” in the structure of the Church, the Council debate has shown that we are not, and never have been. Several Council Fathers brought up a point which has been under great debate within the Catholic press in this country — the right of the laity to speak up on Church matters, as long as they are motivated by charity'and speak in the bond of unity. Too often a competent layman speaks up on a matter affecting the Church and is slapped down as "arrogant", merely for speaking his mind. HERE WE are not talking about negative or destructive criticism. That is not wanted from either bishops, priests, or the laity. What is needed, however, is a greater understanding that while respect is due to authority within the Church, we are all essentially brothers in Christ; that the subordinate should be able to express him self without constantly being accused of flout ing authority. More important, if the layman is competent in the field on which he expresses, himself, he should be listened to with respect, and his good faith and sincerety accepted unless aproved otherwise. Patience is going to have to be the watchword. The Holy See may not promulgate all that some of the laity expect. We should offer prayerful thanks for whatever clarifications are made of our role in life. We can also meditate on all the things that we could have done; which up to now, we have failed to do out of apathy or self-pity’; and get on with the job of being true witnesses in 'the establishment of the Kingdom of Christ. REAPINGS AT RANDOM