Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

THURSDAY, JULY 8, 1965 GEORGIA BULLETIN PAGE 5 POSTHUMOUS OFFERING Flannery O’Connor-Reality BY REV. LEONARD F.X. MAYLEW Just short of ayear after the untimely death Of Georgia author, Flannery O’Connor, a post humous!. volume of her short stories has been published: Everything That Rises Must Converge (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, $4.95). Its appear ance restirs the haunting sense of deprivation created by her death. At the same time, it is somehow consoling that a spirit of genius was not so suddenly nor so completely cut off in the midst of her creativity. The appearance of more of her words seems reassuring that the easily spoken cliche will, in her case, be true: she will live on in her work. FOR THOSE who have not read the work of Flannery O’ Connor, this new volume will be a good introduction~in some ways, perhaps, better than beginning with her earlier writings. Her literary executor, Robert Fitzgerald, prefaces the stories with a moving and incisive account of her short, brilliant ca reer. He tells of her life in Milledgeville, Georgia as a young girl and student. When she went to New York to pursue her literary work, she stayed in the home of Mr. Fitzgerald for some time. Their friendship clearly outdistanced the complexities of author-critic-litterateur, without sacrificing any of the reverence ob jectively owed her talent. He captures the warmth and cheer of her personality when he writes of their evenings together, “Our talks then and at the dinner table were long and light hearted, and they were our movies, our con certs and our theatre.*' When her illness be came serious and permanent, she moved back to Georgia and, last summer, she died. Flannery O’Connor was a story-teller of gen ius. To appreciate her writing, we have to ap proach it prepared to listen to the story, to allow the story and its characters to speak to us on their — and, her—own terms. The stories are rich in meaning but it willlonly come to us, if we let them and their characters live in our selves. Her writing is imaginative, as Mr. Fitz gerald remarks, sometimes comic, sometimes tragic, but always imaginative. “We had better let our awareness Of the knowledge in her stories,’’ he continues,” grow quietly without forcing it, for nothing could be worse than to treat them straight off as problems for exegesics or as texts to preach on.” She always mistrusted the mechanics of literary criticism and this is probably the reason. Analysis of what her stories have to say never succeeds in saying it with as much energy as the stories themselves say it. FLANNERY O’Connor was conscious ofherself as a Southern writher and a Catholic writer. While the literary influences on her work might be multiplied by the dozens, these are the two that specified her work uniquely and are, there fore, most worthwhile to discuss. In die cul tural patterns of the rural South (and that is what she primarily meant by “the South’’) she saw a powerful influence “by a Christianity of a not too unorthodox kind and by a strong de votion to the Bible, which has kept our minds attached to the concrete and the living symbol...*' This was a conscious consideration in her writ ing. Not that the people she wrote about should be thought of as symbols. That would ruin every thing. She intends that we see them as people who, like all real people and all real events, have a meaning—a symbolism—that transcends what appears outwardly.She connects this with her Catholic faith. “The Catholic sacramental View of life (outward signs supporting and effect ing invisible and transforming realities) is one that maintains and supports at every turn the vision that the story teller must have if he is going to write fiction of any depth.’’ Far from feeling restricted by the Church, she felt that Catholicism opened up areas of meaning and a discriminating approach to life that actually liberated the writer. FLANNERY O’CONNOR’S fiction has been cate gorized as “grotesque.” The present volume of her work is ample evidence of how she understood this term — and of how others have misunderstood it. The unifying theme of the stories in Everything That Rises Must Con verge is the horrow, the tragi-comedy emobied in counterfeit love or counterfeit virtue. Faced with real love, or real virtue, or death, the synthetic make-believe that we are tempted to accept as normal dissolves. Again and again, she forces us to face the truth that our be trayal of love is really solitude, our betrayal of virtue is really vice. This is not pessimistic and destructive; it is "a purifying terror.” The protagonist of “The Enduring Chill,” one of the best stories of the present collection, faces the truth that he will not die the dramatic, sentimental death he had imagined but remain a humbled, helpless invalid: “A feeble cry, a last impos sible protest escaped him. But the Holy Ghost, emblazoned in ice instead of fire, continued, implacable, to descend.” The stories are not all perfect — but some of them are, absolutely. GOOD NEWS Quite A .itmO 9(43 ssif 1 ' •'obssrcl'ioJtsvol a w -BY MARY PERKINS RYAN IT IS CERTA INLY very difficult, given the arch- tecture of many churches, to implement the spirit as well as the letter of the changes in the liturgy. The long-and-narrow Gothic type of church build ing, for instance, was designed for a Mass thought of as something to be present at, not to take part in. The “new” idea, that the congregation should feel themselves to be gathered around the table of the Lord, will take quite awhile to implement in every parish church. It isn’t a question of size or the number of people to be accomodated Our parish church, for instance, is quite small, made out of an old New England house. The interior is almost square and the people are on three sides of the sanctuary. Now that the altar for Mass is out away from the wall, and the celebrant stands behind it, he really does look as though he were presiding at a gathering round a table. But the same effect was obtained at the re cent Baltimore Liturgical Week - in the vast Civic Center, -as it has been at previous liturgical weeks in equally vast auditoriums, because the altar was set up to look like the center round which people were gathered. Maybe something could be done even with long and narrow church buildings, if somebody with imagination and the right idea were allowed to get at them. Something could, one would think, be done about pews, for in stance. Surely they could be designed so that they don’t seem to keep people apart, but rather gathered together in an orderly and reasonably comfortable way. Even worse, of course, than a style of archi tecture that is fighting the changes is a cele brant who isn’t “with” them. When one has to hear the Word of God read in English as if it really didn’t mean anything and was just some thing to get through, when the priest faces the people but speaks and acts as if he were doing something very hush-hush all by himself that they are eavedropping at, one is tempted to wish th@,t he were celebrating the Mass the old way. The new letter seems worse than useless without To Go Yet the new • spirit — and it is almost' impossible for the people to have the new spirit if the cele brant doesn't. OF COURSE, the rites themselves at the pre sent stage of reform aren't consistent in facili tating the new spirit either. It doesn’t make nay sense for the celebrant to lapse into Latin at all, if the people are really meant to be “in on” what he is ssying and doing. ("Dicentes: Holy holy, holy., is perhaps the silliest of all die switches from Latin to English and back, but they are all infuriating.,Particularly when he is carrying out the great Eucharistic Prayer, in the course of which the celebrant acts "in the per son of Christ”, it doesn’t make anysenSefor him to be speaking in Latin and in a “low tone.” Our Lord certainly didn’t speak in a dead language and under His breath at the Last Supper when He said, “This is My Body...” “This is My Blood...” It doesn’t make any sense, that is, according to the "new” idea of the Mass, set out in the Constitution on the Liturgy, which , seems to be nearer to the New Testament idea than anything we have had for many centuries. But we have a long way to go to carry out the transformation the Church is determined on, of a Mass that became fossilized as an “ancient rite” (how ever intense our personal devotion at it) into a Mass that will be a joyful personal and communal celebration of God’s love accom plishing its wonderful works in our midst. We shall have to change our architecture, ourmusic, our art and, above all, ourselves if the present and future reforms in the rites are to be effective. BUT SOMETIMES one can realize a little of what it will be like when all this is achieved. In our parish, for instance, and surely in many others throughout the country, we are blessed with priests who celebrate Mass as if they were really presiding at a gathering in which everyone was meant to be concerned with what is going on. At every Mass, the celebrant car ries out the Eucharistic prayer in such a way that we do not feel "included out” while he is going through mysterious rites on his own, but included in a gathering in which,through his vi sible ministry as celebrant, the Lord is carry ing out what He did at the Last Supper so that we can be part of it. At such a Mass, one feels that we are on our way, that all the present are already proving worthwhile. FOREIGN AID STUDY Your World And Mine CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4 A recent book from a major U.S. publisher shrieked that "$103 billion in foreign aid haS poured out of the U.S. treasury since the last war.” The clear implication in the context was that this money had been spent, and spent with little result, in the development of the under developed world. Actually, five percent of that sum (or $1 per U.S. citizen annually since 1945) would be closer to the facts. What is perhaps most surprising is that so little has achieved so much. ARNOLD VIEWING ‘The Yellow Rolls’ Q. A PROMOTER of the John Birch Society in our community is now most active in the Catholic Traditionalist Movement, and has sent out several hundred copies of the Catholic Traditionalist Manifesto, May a good Catholic in conscience support the movement of a “spiritual leader*’ who has been silenced by his Cardinal? Is there a possibility that those who follow in the footsteps of Father De Pauw by promoting his movement may find themselves called to silence? A. I WANT to thank my questioner for sending a copy of the Manifesto and a print ed letter from the Secretary, Gloria Brit- ting Cuneo, The only address of the Move ment is a P. O. Box number in New York. These are sad documents, indeed, but they are revealing. The first thing I note is how thoroughly ggjg un-traditional is the Catholic Traditionalist Movement, The letter urges that we write (and get all our friends to write) the Holy Father, that we write or wire the Apostolic Delegate, write or wire our own bishop, write Cardinal Shehan, and let our local priests know our views and beliefs. Addresses are given for Pope Paul, the apostolic delegate, and Cardinal She han, and it is noted that the airmail postage rate to “Rome, Vati can City” is 15 cents. (Even the manner of giving the Pope’s ad dress shows a measure of ignorance). All we need to tell the Holy Father is that we are in agreement with the aims of the CTM. He will know what we mean. Since when has Catholic tradition called for a large scale mail ing campaign, putting pressure -on our religious leaders as we would on our Senators and Representatives in Congress? It is a part of pur American democratic process, and it may have some intrinsic value, but it is certainly a radical innovation - not tra dition - in Holy Mother Church; and I doubt that our Pope and bis hops will view it with approval. THE “TRADmONALISrS** justify their mail lobby technique by quoting the statement of Vatican Council II that the laity “are permitted and sometimes even obliged to express their opinion on those things which concern the good of the Church...” This statement, while fairly accurate, does not deserve quotation marks because it is eliptical. Besides it quotes out of context. If our ‘Traditionalists” were honest they should have continued with their quotation, rather than ending with a line of dots. The Con stitution continues, regarding the laity’s expressing their opinion: “When occasions arise, let this be done through the organs erect ed by the Church for this purpose. Let it always be done in courage and in prudence, toward those who by reason of their sacred office represent the person of Christ.” Q. How far over backward are you going to lean? According to our own Bible, "For thine is the kingdom, etc., is NOT part of the Lord’s Prayer. Please do not confuse our young Catholics. A. Sometimes our young people are less easily confused than our older people. Many of them now learn in school that the ph rase: “For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen,” had an ancient Catholic origin; has been used in its Greek, Slavic or other equivalent, by Byzantine Catholics for most centuries of the Christian era, as an ending to the Lord’s Prayer; is still used by millions of Catholics just as good and or thodox as you and I, as an ending to the Lord’s Prayer; and was at one time found in various Catholic editions of the Bible, as an ending to the Lord’s Prayer. Where do you think the Protest ants got this phrase? They diqln’t invent it. BY JAMES W. ARNOLD HE: It’s got a good title: “The Yellow Rolls Royce.” After that it begins to go downhill. SHE: The film or the car? It really wasn’t that bad. Think of all the scenery. How often do you get Ascot, Pisa, Rome, the Mediterranean and Yugoslavia all in one picture? UNCLE GEORGE (grouchily): % Nuts to the title. There are a million better ones, if you must use cars. How about ’The Pink Thunderbird”? HE: No, that reminds me of a drink. Or a kind of wild motel. Rolls Royce definitely has more class, SHE: It’s a good thing. Did you ever stop to think what that movie is all about? Hanky—panky in the back seat, that’s what. Crawford, naturally, would be purple. Instead of a decanter inside, there could be an axe. SHE: There was that bit when Rex Harrison says to his wife, Jeanne Moreau: “You’re not extraordinary. Just ideal. But I suppose to be ideal is to be extraordinary,” It sounds pro found, HE: That Harrison episode was the best. It had a tenuous connection to real life; the irony of a man with every worldly success except a faithful wife. The British aristocracy’s need to keep up a front - to be unaffected before the world. Nicely underplayed and, well, touching. The hanky-panky was kept in focus: clumsy, silly, a little sad. SHE: It was worth it just for the dresses and that country estate. It must be the biggest set since "Marienbad.” HE: How did Ingrid Bergman put it? ing foolishly.” ‘Behav- SHE: It may be foolish behavior in a Rolls but it’s just plain smut in a Chevrolet. UNCLE GEORGE: Then there’s ‘The Black Maserati." That would have to be about Sicily, with an orgy by Fellini. HE: Actually it’s a clever idea. I always enjoy those episode films that trace the history of an ob ject as it goes from one person to another. As a kid, I remember one about a tuxedo. Edward G. Robinson is a bum who rents it, see, to go to his college class reunion... SHE: Wien the French do it, it’s usually about * love.” The foreign minister loves his secretary, and she loves a motorcyclist, and he loves a can can dancer, and she loves a wine-taster. And he, when focusing correctly, loves the foreign-ninis- ter’s wife. UNCLE GEORGE: All that would be too crowded in a Renault. Dare I suggest ’The Peach Peu geot”? HE: Anyway, it’s not the best episode movie I’ve seen. And Asquith and Rattigan have done bet ter, too. Even ‘The V.LP.’s” was better. SHE: There he goes again. Asquith? Ratti gan? Who do they play for? HE: My dear, you’ll never understand films. They are the director and writer. They made the film. The actors just stand about and show their teeth. Now Asquith and Rattigan like talky drama. Did you notice that tonight? It was like a garden club tea. Movies should move. For all the gab, I can’t recall a piece of dialog worth quoting. One can recognize the simple truth and remain perpendicular. GEORGE: The color for Bette Davis and Joan Reapings Continued CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4 YET, FT IS this regard for man’s freedom which keeps the Catholic Liberal in his liberalism, as difficult and embarrassing as this may be. His commitment to his Catholic heritage, and his com mitment to this American heritage lead him to this conclusion. A deep knowledge of the history of the Church, of her insistence on the dignity which flows from the fact of man’s freedom, and her unceasing efforts to raise him to the point where he can live the glorious freedom of the sons of God, inspire him to avoid the temptation to quit before the forces that'would immerse man in any deter minism. In the light of this urgency he reads the con demnations by the nineteenth century Church of the nineteenth century abuses and errors, and ac cepts them. But he does not find in them what was not there in the first place — a condemnation of freedom itself. His love of his American heritage leads him to the same position. A real admiration of the works of our Founding Fathers lets him see the genius behind their work, and leads him to desire to see the work progress a pace. The areas of freedom must expand, or they will atrophy. But the threats to freedom increase with the expansion of the country and the world. HE NEITHER DENIES nor decries the expan sions that have occurred and will occur, but he does search them carefully for any threat they hold. He protects the things he loves against this threat, without denying the good that is avail able in the expansions. The eye of the eagle and the dexterity of the tight rope walker are hardly sufficient for his task. Like his Thesaurus, Roget has led us from hu mor to the depths of a real problem. The best hope for a solution to the real problem is our ability to keep our sense of humor. God help us when that has been sacrificed. OLD AND NEW Romans And Sabines Sr OUR ENTRIE foreign aid effort would, I believe have achieved far more if it had not often gone astray as regards its purpose. The justification of development aid, in my opinion, is that it promotes the interests of the United States. V\e cannot hope to have normality within our frontiers while a great and growing part of the world is a slum. If the gap between developed and undeveloped continues to widen, tension must mount to ultimate explosion. Many will give verbal assent to this proposition, but as a nation we do not yet accept it. GARRY WILLS Apparently Evelyn Waugh is not alone in his belief that, however much "liberal priests" may talk about things like liturgical change, with they really want is wives. The odd thing is that many lesser Waughs, who feel that virginity Is a sublime ideal, are just as cer tain that the priestly elite of Christendom, after long training in this ideals’ sublimites, would desert the single state en masse if given any chance to exercise individual choice. Paradoxi cally, the more these people are convinced that celibacy is imposed on a restless crew, themore determined they become on enforcing it. They seem afraid of the spectacle they must imagine as the result of any "softening” on Rome’s part — i.e., the greatest rush toward anything nubile since Romulus invited the Sabines over for lunch. Even great men get a bit unbalanced on the subject of a celibate priesthood. The young Newman, for instance, went through a terrible period of writing and destroying denun ciations of his friends, Henry Wilberforce, when that Anglican priest married. Newman saw him self and his Oxford friends, in a typically lan guishing line of verse, as "pilgrims pale with Paul’s sad girdle bound.” It is not a very heartwarming prospect. No wonder poor Wil berforce slipped off the “sad girdle.” MANY PEOPLE, it seems clear, do not like to think of priest “that way”, and resent being asked to do so. Yet Catholics of all people, should not be disturbed by the idea of married priests. After all, they place the greatest em phasis on the actual and symbolic role of St. Peter, the first Pope; and Peter was a married man. He did not wear “Paul's sad girdle.” The harsh Pauline Virginity, the rapt Johannine my sticism, obviously have their place in the Chris tian ministry. But in Peter’s day, at least, that place was not the Papacy. The first Supreme Pontiff is pictured holding the keys; we do not often imagine, among them, the head of the household’s key. Perhaps we should. Modern reasons for asking priests to be celibate are not the same as those that first prompted the law. The Church inherited a cul tural complex) of sexual attitudes that looked upon everything connected with reproduction - menstruation, coitus, childbirth — as a form of pollution, requiring purification before one could approach holy things again. We are annually re minded of this primitive concept by the ironic liturgy that celebrates Mary ’s purificiation after Christ’s birth -- “a Priests daily touch holy things — so went the ancient instinct and there fore they should abstainfrom sexual contacts that require elaborate purification. This belief -- reinforced by a monastic code, by anti feminism, and by a pagan superstition about the magic force of virginity surely entered into the decision to make celibacy a duty for priests of the Roman rite. (I am not talking here about the ascetical mystery of virginity itself. That has deep spiritual roots in the Gospel precept about “eunuchs for the kingdom of hea ven’s sake” and in the New Testament examples of Jesus, Mary, Joseph, John the Baptist, and St. Paul. I am talking only about the decision to make the separate vocation of the virgin an indispensable adjunct of the priestly life, and of various cultural conditions that contri buted to that decision). TODAY WE HAVE different supersitions. The two main ones, I suppose, are; 1. The pseudo-practical view: The priestwould be distracted from his duties by family life. Yet doctors, teachers, scientists, Protestant mis sionaries, and others can be very devoted to their work. Besides, the job of maintaining celi bacy in our cultural climate can get pretty dis tracting — a thing indicated by the heavy drinking and feverish hobbies of certain priests (“I was married to my golf bag”) 2. The pseudo-mystical view: The man who “divides his heart”* 'with his family must love. God and mankind less. This resembles the li beral crudity that says love for mankind at large is diminished by a special affection for one's own countrymen. The heart is not a re servoir to be tapped sparingly, lest it run dry. The more we love, the more love we have to give; and this love is always particularizing. It sets each person apart for special love, even as it includes more and more of mankind in its compass. The doctrine of Thomas a Kempis, that one becomes a man by avoiding contact with other men, is a caricature of the biblical attitude toward virginity. WHEN ALL THIS is said, a strong case re in ains for priestly celibqcy.Sex and religion are, taken separately, unsettling things. Mixed they are explosive. The magnetic preacher is a danger to himself and others if part of the magnetism derives from his sexual availabi lity. Bishop Sheen has been called almost every thing; but not, thank God,” the most eligible bachelor of the cocktail-ecclesiastic set.” Msgr. Knox’s book on the great fanatics, Entusiasm, shows how oddly the ascetic and the erotic emotions mix, how easy it is for the cult to be come the revel. There is a great lesson to be learned from the history of religious aberration. God Love You BY BISHOP FULTON J. SHEEN WHAT IS THE PECULIAR psychology in man which makes him more attached to his wealth as he gets closer to his death? So many behave like soldiers in an army preparing for war rather than those preparing to leave the battlefield after victory. They drag all the "impedimenta” (the old word for baggage which impeded a journey) instead of leaving behind the surplus which is no longer needed. The Sacrament of Confirmation is a preparation for the battle of Christian life, but the Sacrament of Extreme Unc tion (Last Annointing) is for the surcease of that battle. Can it be that our fear of death in the mod ern world is less concerned with our indi vidual end than with our collective end? Has not the nuclear bomb made us think of whole sale destruction rather than of a personal departure? But if one looks at things aright, does not each individual’s personal life begin, not with his birth, but with his death? It is not the arrow in flight that interests the arch er as much as whether it strikes the target. What happens at death is the final "What then?” This question can be asked of a boy when he quits high school or college or is mar ried, but the last "What then?” determines eternity. Here are some important considerations for anyone who has reached the middle of life: Are there any sins for which I should do penance? Have I been so loyal to my faith that I have no need of making up for my lack of it by bringing others the faith after my death? How shall I recognize Christ on the day of my death un less, during life, I met Him where He lives anonymously in the poor, the sick and the hungry? Will He say to me then "I was hungry, thirsty, sick, and you gave...” or “I was a stranger and you did not give...”? Why do I allow stocks and bonds to pile up in my vault, accumulating interest and adding to my responsibility) if it makes me like the rich man in the Gospel who dined well every day while ignoring Lazarus at his gate? Shall I give my wealth to those who will make more investments? Do I want those who re ceive it to increase it, exchanging my hard-earned money for new Wall Street investments? THERE ARE TWO WAYS to avoid this. The first is to make a VVill, leaving everything to the Holy Father who will give all of it to the poor of the world and the Missions within the year of your death. The other way is to take out an Annuity, receive an income while you live (reduce your taxes), and at your death the remain der goes to the Holy Father to be spent that year. This is the great advantage of giving to The Society for the Propagation of the Faith, the middle man for the Holy Fatherwho gives it to the poor For more information write to me at 366 Fifth Avenue, New York, 10001, N.W/ God Love You! GOD LOVE YOU to Mr. and Mrs. G. S. for $20 “We promised that if we made over $500 on the sale of our hay we would send this to you.” ...to the D.V.W. family for $10 “Please accept this little gift for the poor— at times like this I wish we were millionaires.’ ...to D.B.L. for $800 “1 am a non-Catholic but I know that the job you are doing needs the help of everyone.” Cut out this column, pin your sacrifice to it and mail it to Most Rev. . Fulton J. Sheen, National Director of The Society for the Propagation of the Faith, 366 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. lOOCil, or to your Diocesan Director, Rev. Harold J. Rainey P.O. Box 12047 2699 Peachtree Road N.E. Northside Station At lanta 5, Georgia.