Newspaper Page Text
CHURCH INCLUDED
Freedoms Ups And Downs
THURSDAY, JANUARY 13, 1966 GEORGIA BULLETIN PAGE 5
ARNOLD VIEWING
Picks 10 ‘Best’ Films
BY REV. LEONARD F.X. MAYHEW
It has been quite a week for freedom in the
country — Church included — both at a dis
tance and closer to home. It is a little artifical
to establish a connection among all the “freedom
crises" principally because the events have no
outward relationship. At the .same time it seems
fair to relate them because of the increasingly
clear evidence that living with freedom is the
great test that presently faces the Church (and
the country too?) in the wake of Vatican II.
Here at home we have had courageous ex
pression of confidence in responsible freedom.
The decree convoking the Lay
Congress of the Archdiocese
of Atlanta was published in
The Georgia Bulletin. This past
week-end instructions were re
ceived in all our parishes re
garding a Nominations Com
mittee to name candiates for the
Lay Congress. The Committee
will name twice as many can
didates as there will be dele
gates and on January 30 there will be parish
wide elections. This is really revolutionary. To
put it mildly, elections are not an everyday occur
rence in the Catholic Church. Aside from con
claves to elect a new Pope and the election of
religious superiors, who has heard of any? And,
with a lay electorate! The spirit of the second Va
tican Council is taking real flesh here in our
midst and we may well be a little awed at our good
fortune and responsibility.
THE NEWS carries another piece of good news.
Ave Maria magazine, published by the Holy Cross
Fathers, carried a courageous piece on thirteen
"silenced" priests of the United States. The crux
of the issue is that these priests have been pena
lized not for misdeeds but for taking a stand in
favor of civil rights and the peace movement. Hie
most widely known individual in the group is Fa
ther Daniel Berrigan, S.J., poet and pilosopher,
described by some who know him well as "the
best priest in the country.” Because Fr. Berri-
gan’s convictions on the Vietnam war did not suit
his religious superiors and ecclesiastical autho
rities in New York, he was exiled -- or received
a "special assignment" — to Latin America,
whichever terminology you may choose to employ.
Father John Reedy, editor of Ave Maria, stated
that the special issue of the magazine aimed to
investigate "a growing pattern that has developed
over the past two or three years." He recom
mended better communications between priests
and their superiors and some way to resolve con
flicts between authority and freedom of con
science. A Methodist Bishop this week has ex
pressed what must be widespread apprehension
over the apparent contradiction between "the ac
tion takenagainstthese priests of the Church (and)
the action promulgated at the fourth session of Va
tican Council II (Decree on Religious Liberty and
Schema 13 on The Church and the Modern World)."
While the repressive action against these priests
is tragic, this reaction against it is heartening.
Now some sad news close to home. A duly
elected representative to the Georgia State As
sembly has been excluded from his seat because
a majority of the members of the House do not like
his views and realize that they can make political
hay out of their action in an election year. That
the victimized representative is a Negro and a
civil rights leader made the settling of old
scores under the guise of politically advantageous
patriot-posing a prospect too good to resist. The
Church-related inter-racial groups, who are sup
posed to speak disinterestedly and fearlessly for
freedom, have so far notmade any statement. How
this can sit well with the prophetic role of the
Church, as outlined) in. the decree on The Church In
The Modern World, is beyond my powers to dis
cern.
THE INTRA-MURAL brouhaha that most rocked
the liberty boat this week concerned an old friend,
Father Gommar DePauw, founder of the Catholic
Traditionalist Movement. The entire story of
Fr. DePauw’s checkered efforts on behalf of re
gression is too tedious and too complex to think
about, much less to recount. He was ordered to
dissociate himself from die Movement by his
bishop, who judged it clearly contrary to the word
and spirit of the Vatican Council’s inspired docu
ment on the Sacred Liturgy. He has regularly is
sued a series of mawkish, infantile denunciations
of the Council’s work and its implementation. Sub
sequent to his bishop’s action removing him from
the C.T.M. Fr.De Pauw journeyed to Rome. Next
he appeared in New York, announced that he had
transferred to the Italian diocese of Tivoli and was
back to head the “work” of the Traditionalists.
The bishop of Tivoli, who seems the principal
pawn in the game, explained that he had accepted
the priest on the recommendation of Cardinal
Ottaviani and with the (presumed) permission of
Cardinal Spellman, who has since denied any link
with the whole dismal affair. Fr. DePauw’s grotes
que failings! are only a sideshow exhibit in the
post-Vatican Council Church. They have no real
importance. The only motive for mentioning them
is that they illustrate the fault with a system that
encourages subterfuge and finds no channels for
open, conscientious free expression.
Three decrees 0 f the Council relate to the pre
sent issue. They are the Decrees on the Laity,
the Constitution on the Church with its doctrine
of episcopal collegiality, and the Decree on Reli
gious Liberty. In the present dispensation of the
Church, real power and freedom to act in the
Church is polarized in the bishops and the laity.
Theirs is the responsibility, in quite different
ways, to make real a respect for persons and an
atmosphere of "dialogue" in the Church.
GOOD NEWS
Family Needs Working At
BY MARY PERKINS RYAN
AS THE STORY goes, an Irish mother of a large
family went to Confession and, when she had ad
mitted to losing her temper with her children,
was advised to imitate the Blessed Mother and St.
Joseph. To which she retorted, "0, thim and
their WanI"
Many parents, 1 imagine, feel the same sense
of hopeless irritation every year when the Feast
of the Holy Family comes
around and they have to listen
to a sermon telling them to imi
tate the Holy Family. (The only
more painful Sunday is Mother’s
Day when most sermons attri
bute to Mother, simply because
she is a mother, such incredi
ble goodness that she must be
ready for canonization — which
is so embarrassing when you
are a mother and lost your temper just before
Mass.)
Of course, nobody really knows what the life
of the Holy Family at Nazareth was like, except
that it was unremarkable — "Is not this the
carpenter’s son?" Families in Nazareth at time
lived at very close quarters with other families,
scholars tell us — perhaps with a room and a
workshop and an open roof of their own, opening
onto a communal. courtyard. Things are often
pretty noisy in such a set-up, especially in the
Near East, so we certainly should not imagine
the Mother of God and her Son and St. Joseph liv
ing in any idyllic and peaceful circumstances.
Even if they never found one another difficult,
they must have had some difficult neighbors.
AGAIN, WHEN priests give sermons on the
Holy Family, they almost always emphasize
Jesus’ obedience. But (as I read somewhere
and it seems to make good sense) when He re
mained behind in Jerusalem and went to the
T emple at the age of twelve, as narrated in the
Gospel of the feast, He was acting like a normal
adolescent asserting his basic independence of
his parents and his final right to follow his God-
given vocation. The lesson given to parents by
the Gospel is not simply that we should train our
children to obedience, but that we should be train
ing them to carry out whatever God wants them to
do, in responsible freedom. God did not create
them for us, but to carry out some unique voca
tion of service to Him and to other people. (In
cidentally, the uneasiness we feel at their efforts
toward independence must have been experienced
by Jesus’ Mother too, after that episode of stay
ing behind in Jerusalem and His mysterious words,
as she “kept all these things in her heart"
through the years of His maturation to full man
hood.)
But still we cannot help wondering, now and
then, how we can take the Holy Family in any real
sense as a model. What have we parents, with
our nerves and tensions and struggles to keep our
temper, with, our several children and their tem
pers and growing pains and almost infinite capaci
ty to annoy one another — what have we in com
mon with the Family at Nazareth, with their one
perfect Child who was the very Son of God?
Well, we do have this in common, a priest';
once pointed out to me when I was complaining
about Holy Family sermons — the Holy Family
was the first Christian community, and our fami
lies are also Christian communities because
"wherever two or three are gathered together in
My Name, there am I in your midst." The Epistle
of the Feast gives very practical advice about how
to go about acting like a Christian community:
we are to bear with one another’s faults (which
means admitting that we all have them and not
being surprised about ft), and be generous and
loving, offering God thanks through Christ in
everything we do.
FORCES IN POLAND
Your World And Mine
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4
of Catholic bishops from around the world would
give it a certain stamp of approval. In parti
cular, an acceptance by the German bishops
would help the Polish claim that its western
frontiers, as fixed on the Oder-Neisse line at the
end of hostilities in 1945, are definitive.
The price might, nevertheless, be too high.
The presence of so many bishops, especially
if they included the Pope, would become a de
monstration to the world of the intensity of the
faith of Poland. That would not only embarrass
the regime vis—a—vis the other Communist states
but would give the Polish hierarchy new leverage
in the eternal jockeying for advantage.
THE RESULT has been the widely publicized
attacks by the regime on the bishops, and par
ticularly on Cardinal Wyszynski, for meddling in
politics. The regime has certainly nd intention
of stopping the celebrations, or even of denying
visas to visiting bishops. But it wants to'establish
the principle that the bishops should not take
initiatives without its prior approval. For Com
munist regimes, no principle is more basic. The
individual or group has no rights. All they enjoy
are privileges, and these are granted and with
drawn by the state in its absolute discretion.
The issue of rights is a sore point with some
influential Catholics, and particularly with the
Cardinal himself. He thinks that the Church must
show its strength, from time to time, as a re
minder that the Communist regime is not the
only power in the land.
Q. I REALIZE that the question of contraception is a very
delicate one, but why can’t we get any decent answers for it?
This is a subject very much discussed among us married women.
I know that a large majority of Catholics
practice contraception; the only difference
is that some feel guilty while others do not.
Why is this so difficult a problem to solve?
If it is God’s law that contraception is wrong
there should be no question about its being
sinful. Then look at all the people that would
be condemned. On the other hand if this is
one of the Church’s laws, why doesn’t she
make it all right for the people to limit their
families in any way that they wish as long as it is legal. They
will continue to do so anyway. Presently the priests seem to be
confused among themselves. Some priests freely give people per
mission to use contraceptives; others will not take this respon
sibility but will not condemn it; then others will strongly con
demn it. I am so confused that I cannot stand it any longer.
PERSONALLY 1 feel that the rhythm method is foolish. Doc
tors will not recommend it. It Is frustrating and unsure; when a
mother has several small children she doesn’t have time to be
taking her temperature. She has her hands full and wants to be
sure that she will not become pregnant until she is ready.
I feel that a husband and wife need each other more when they
desire the conjugal union than when it happens to be safe ac
cording to the rhythm charts. To us this is very fustrating and
much more artificial than any means of contraception could
ever be.
BY JAMES W. ARNOLD
THE ANNUAL critical ordeal of selecting the
year’s Ten Best was made harder in 1965 because
there were more really good films than wash-
and-wear shirts at a three-day convention. The
best movies were not necessarily better than in
previous years; there were simply more of them.
It was a year to make a
moviegoer optimistic. A spe
cial delight was the increasing
trend toward movies that are
cinematic, that rely for their
effects on visual images or on
artistic devices possible only
in the film medium.
Here, then, are my choices.
DARLING (John Schlesinger): The poor—little-
girl-who-has-everything theme is not new, but
here she happens to be the dream girl of an
entire culture. Rarely have theme and images been
so beautifully united; what’s more,there is Julie
Christie.
THOSE MAGNIFICENT MEN (Ken Annakin):
A rare non-cynical comedy, iequipped, with
splended old airplanes, an international cast
of clowns, and the mad but soaring human spi
rit.
Conjugal love is considered one of the most important aspects
of married life. How can a couple enjoy thispriviledgevhen there
is always a fear of having an unwanted child or guilt resulting
from the use of contraceptives?
NOTHING BUT A MAN (Michael Roemer):
This realistic piece about ordinary people
struggling for the ordinary joys of life as Negroes
in the white South is the best film yet on the race
issue, and brims with beauty and truth.
Although children are the basic foundation of a good mar
riage, too many children can also ruin a marriage.
Please try to answer this; so many women feel as I do.
A. I wish I had a nice easy answer which would solve all the
problems. I wish I had a clear, precise answer which would set
tle all the doubts. But you can hardly expect me to solve ques
tions which the bishops of the Church in Vatican Council II
were unable to answer.
The final document accepted by the Council was the Consti
tution oh the Church in the Modern World. In it there is a chap
ter on Fostering the Nobility of Marriage and the Family. In it
there is emphasis on the personal aspects of the "intimate
partnership of married life and love” as distinguished from its
social and biological purposes which have traditionally received
primary attention. The procreative purpose is not overlooked,
to be sure, but the stress seems to be on statementslike these:
“AUTHENTIC married love is caught up into divine; love and
is governed and enriched by Christ’s redeeming powey and the
saving activity of the Church, so that this love may lead the
spouses to God with powerful effect...Thus they increasingly
advance the perfection of their own personalities, as well as
their mutual sanctification, and hence contribute jointly to the
glory of God."
‘OLD AND NEW
HELP (Richard Lester): Made of pure high
spirits and brash unblinking hokum, this Beatles
film finds visual bounce to match its music;
perhaps never before have teenagers been deemed
worthy of so much invention and imagination.
THE HALLELUJAH TRAIL (John Sturges): This
exuberant and widely underrated western spoof
of the human passion for booze is tart around
the edges but burbon smooth inside. The sand
storm Indian fight may be the single funniest
sequence of the year,
THE SOUND OF MUSIC (Robert Wist): Much
too sweet, pretty and nice for today's vinegary
tastes, this is still one of the truly brilliant
adaptations of a stage musical for the medium
of film.
SEANCE ON E- WEX AFTERNOON (Bryan
Forbes): This gloomy thriller about a kidnaping
and the basic decency of an ordinary man is so
well acted (by Kim Stanley and Richard Atten
borough) and photographed that it seems to be
lived rather than filmed.
9
THE UMBRELLAS OF CHERBOURG (Jacques
Demy): A childlike miracle in a year of cyni
cism, it is impossible that this film could have
been made by businessmen. It is Gentle, Inno
cent, Lovely.
THE KNACK (Richard Lester): Many film
comedies are about sex, and this one of the fun
niest and most cinematic. There is a trip through
London with an old bed that defies belief.
THE GREAT RACE (Blake Edwards): From
subtleties like the twinkling of the hero's teeth
to non-subtleties like a pie-throwing orgy, this is
a non-stop comic masterpiece. If Laurel and
Hardy had been this good, a whole generation
might never have grown up.
WAS 1965 A good year otherwise? Consider
some of the films that had to be left out of the
Ten Best. Among the also-rans were such first-
rate adventure tales as "TheTrain,” "VonRyan’s
Express" and "High Wind in Jamaica"; absorb
ing adult dramas like "Zorba the Greek,”
Reapings Continue
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4
costs of the sin of disunity?
♦do we understand the unity for which we work
and pray? can it mean greater variety within
a greater unity?
*since i there is value in tension, conflict,
abrasion, is it time for us to examine and face
openly even the most delicate issues which sep
arate us?
♦would there be value in more shared retreats
for ministers and priests, for Roman Catho
lic and non-Roman Catholic lay people?
♦what other ways:an we cooperate, collaborate
— in such ways as joint Bible studies, estab
lishment of ecumenical libraries, publications,
other institutions?
♦must people be formally trained in ecumenism
before allowed to engage in dialogue? or is it
not true that our pluralism places them in sit
uations of dialogue already?
Co-responsibility, collegiality and collabora
tion are the keys. "We should do together all
those things which conscience does not compel us
to do separately." So:
♦how can we develop ever greater collaboration
in meeting the problems of human needs?
♦does our own experience of gaining benefit
from Protestant participation show us that
every attempt at dialogue, even within the
Church in the .strictest sense, could be en
hanced by participation or at least observa
tion and consultation by Protestant colleagues?
’are we convinced that there isnoone waytodo
things, that no one person or one group has
sole responsibility, that there are different
levels of development and experience - all of
them valuable and necessary as responses of
the whole People of God to his Word?
vJdsdoriq
What’s In A Name?
BY GARRY WILLS
WHY IS THAT Shakespearean play we all read
in school called Julius Caesar? Many would pre
fer to call it Brutus — though it might almost
as well be called Cassius or Anthony, The play
has no single focus, but four almost equally im
portant roles — four very different men whose
shifting relations with each
other make up the action. Add,
at the end, Octavian, who will
inherit all the power coursing
back and forth among the four,
and you have a sinister qua
drille.
Why then, of the five, is
Caesar given prominence in the
(and in the first mention of
play, by a Swiss visitor to Lon
don who attended a performance of it in 1599)?
Many answers have been given to this question,
all tending to the mystical. Caesar is the "mighty
shade"haunting all the scenes; Caesarism is the
issue; the dictator is the hub of that empire
whose 33 spokes drive inward at him and splinter
against each other in his flesh.
IT MAY BE SO. But I wonder what Shakespeare
would have made of all this? We do not know
much about his attitude to his work; but we know
something about the conditions of that work. For
instance: that Swiss traveler who saw Julius
Caesar in 1599 notes that it was presented by
"about fifteen players," Yet there are 34 named
parts in the play, plus an unruly mob of “friends,
Romans, countrymen." Obviously, a good deal
of costume - changing was going on behind the
scenes as actors took on two, three, or even
four parts. Two of the players were boys -- one
to play Caesar's wife Calpurnia and, later, the
boy Lucilius; the other to play Portia (and,
probably, to do extra service as an attendant
on Calpurnia). That leaves about thirteen men to
play the other thirty parts, do service as a mob,
and dance the jig at the end of the performance.
These are the logistics Shakespeare had to cope
with when writing a play. Mystical stuff about
Caesar’s shade is all very well; but first one
must get Caesar's body — and all the others --
on and off stage in such a way that the proper
changes, regroupings, and part - divisions work
out.
Imagine, then, Shakespeare writing Julius Cae
sar — or roughing out its action in conversa
tion with his fellow players. Imagine, say, that it
is five o’clock one afternoon in 1598. The com
pany has just finished performing its new hit,
with Burbadge as Henry V and a brilliant new
clown, Robert Armin, playing Pistol. (Will Kempe
is gone, along with his great creation, Falstaff).
The .troop has danced, changed clothes, and re
tted to the sign of the Mermaid for food and
drink. After dinner they will be rehearsing As
Yqu Like It, since these plays have short runs
and new ones must be in constant preparation.
(Luckily, they have their own new theater with
its bright straw roof to rehearse in finding a
place for rehearsals used to be a problem).
BURBADGE enters. Shakespeare, who had act
ed his big scene early in the afternoon (as an
Archbishop) is already in their room at the ta
vern, with a book open.
"What is it this time, Will? More history plays
out of Holinshed, or another of those Italian no
vels 7 ^
“Something new, Dick. Or old. Plutarch’s Ro
man Lives. Some damn good scenes in here. I
think we had better get twenty or sp Roman cos
tumes made up — hot those hokey Athenian things
we used when you insulted poets while strutting
around as Theseus of Athens.”
"You had to give me those lines after showing
how a star scrambles for the good parts in that
Bottom scene. Kempe didn’t have to imitate all
my tricks.”
“Wearing the ass’s ears made him feel like
you.”
"What part will I get in this Roman thing you’re
working on?”
"WELL, I CAN’T decide which Life to use.
Three of them overlap —■ Caesar, Brutus, Antony.
Caesar is the biggest man, but his best scene
is his death. He won’t be around long."
"Bring me back as his ghost. I’ll show you how
you should have acted your ghost scene in Ric
hard III."
"We’ll call the play Caesar, then, since the
crow expects you to take the lead. I’ll make
one of the conspirators a wit, for Armin. And
put in a noble Roman wife for Dicky Robinson.”
"YOU SURE this Caesar part is good enough
to keep my vocal cords in condition?"
"Don’t worry. Take it easy during this play,
and I’ll give you a huge part in the new one I’m
considering. It will have more lines than any
role I’ve given you since Richard."
"Damn good role. Practically by best. What’s
the new one? Another king?"
"ALMOST. A prince. Pull in your stomach
and I’ll insult the truth by calling you a student,
home from Wittenberg. Luckily, the prince pre
tends to be crazy half the time, so you won’t
have to act during those stretches."
"I don’t know what good it does me to own part
of a company in which I get nothing but insults."
“It gets a play named after your part, even
when it is not a very big one. How is your dying
in togas this year? Handle it well, and I'll let
you use Latin in your last gasp."
Here, Dick moans, and gets up to refill his
cannikin. As he is going out the door, Will writes
"Julius Caesar" at the top of a clean sheet
of foolscap.
r? r*'t$ , c-.’-. r: 4. * > •. •
God Love You
MOST REVEREND FULTON J. SHEEN
A MISSIONARY visiting our office told of a couple who,
after becoming Christians, continued to practice pagan sor
cery. When' questioned,r they denied that they had reverted
to such evil practices. The missionary was still doubtful so
he asked the couple if they would be willing
to swear to the truth of their statements
on the Bible. They both took the oath and
within seconds dropped dead.
Today there is a general tendency to deny
the existence of the devil, and never is
he so powerful as when men say he does not
exist. God defines Himself as "I Am Who
Am” or "It Is My Nature To Be." The de
vil defines himself as "I am not.” An
incident of the kind described bythismissio-
nary makes us aware of him whom Our Lord calls the "Prince
of this World.” The only thing that he will ever have will be
this world. Never will he gain heaven and in the end only the
material carcass of an atomic blast will be his final possess
ion. We who believe in Christ, the Savior of the world,
have the positive task of being witnesses or missionaries’
of His name. We also have the negative task of resisting the
growing power of the devil, not only in his collective mys
tical body of Anti-Christ or of Communism but also in his
more democratic disguise where we see only his tail.
Does the devil insinuate himself into the Church? We can
hardly deny it since Peter the Rock became the stumbling
Stone when he adm itted the Divine Christ and denied the
Suffering Christ. The devil is in our Church when he tells
us "Build up your parish halls and forget the other parishes
of the world. Increase your surpluses and ignore the poor
bishops in Latin America who have four priests to cover pa
rishes of 100,000 square miles. Do not sacrifice yourself
to bring Christ to lands other than America. Parochial and
diocesan security come first, then the Kingdom of God on
earth.” All of us, in different degrees, have succumbed
to him who first appears as a tempter saying, “It is not
wrong” and then turns into an advisor saying, "Now see
what you have done." In God’s name, may we in North America
see that our personal improvement depends on recognizing
not only our faults but also that the progress of the Church
depends on giving more than' 31 <t per Catholic to the Holy
Father each year for the poor of the world. Don’t you agree?
If so then write and tell us. God Love You!
GOD LOVE YOU to the many readers who sacrificed Christ
mas presents and Christmas cards to send the equivalent
to those in mission lands who had nothing for Christmas.,
to E.F. for $10 "earned by having to work overtime during
the power failure.”
INCREASE YOUR knowledge and love of the Missions by read
ing MISSION, a pocket-sized, bi-monthly magazine edited by
Most Rev. Fulton J. Sheen. Keep yourself up-to -date on mission
activities the world over. Let us put you on our subscrip
tion list for only one dollar a year.
CUT OUT this column, pin your sacrifice to it and mail it to
Most Rev. Fulton . Sheen, National Director of The Society for
the Propagation of the Faith, 366 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y.
10001, or ;o your f Diocesan Director,Rev. Harold J. Rainey, P. O.
Box 12047, 2699 Peachtree Road, N.E. Northside Station,
tlanta 5, Georgia.