Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

PAGE 4 GEORGIA BULLETIN THURSDAY, JANUARY 21, 1966 the Archdiocese of Atlanta SERVING 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 wfm- .MANAGING EDITOR Gerard E. Sherry CONSULTING EDITOR Rev. R. Donald Kiernan 2699 Peachtree N. E. P. O. Box 11667 Northside Station Atlanta, Georgia 30305 ASSOCIATE EDITOR Rev. Leonard F. X. Mayhew Member of the Catholic Press Association and Subscriber to N. C. W. C."*News Service Telephone 231-1281 Second Class Permit at Atlanta, Ga. U. S. A. $5.00 Canada $5.00 Foreign $6.50 No Pretense We are now in the midst of the Week of Christian Unity, which has been publicized in The Georgia Bulletin and the secular press. For the first time, observance of the Week of Chris tian Unity is being marked with a serious effort to bring about broad participation by religious people of all Christian commun ions. Each night during the Week, which runs from January 18 to 25, a special Scripture and Pra yer service for the intention of Christian unity is being held in a different Christian church in Atlanta. Members of all these churches are being urged by their pastors to attend. Archbishop Hallinan is one of the sponsors of the Week and has urged Catholics to take part. The beauty of such an obser vance as we are witnessing in Atlanta lies in the spirit and mo tivation that have brought it about. What underlies the Week of Christian Unity is not any super ficial attitude of fellowship for its own sake or a naive pretense that real differences can easily be erased. The actual motivation for this precedent-setting event is a profound conviction that unity among Christians is a basic ele**- ment of Christ's foundationofirhe Church. As the Vatican Council has admitted, the divisions among Christians are due to faults on all sides and to historical situa tions which have long since dis appeared. What remains is the clear imperative of the Gospels that the Lord wills oneness among his followers. It would be reassuring to be able to see clearly how Chris tian reunion will come about. Unfortunately, there is no one who can see the final resolution of our disunity. The outcome is quite literally a matter of God's power and goodness not being defined by our limited vi sion. There can be no doubt that the grace of Christian unity will be conditioned on the sincere prayer of all Christian people. This is the reason for the Week of Christian Unity prayer ser vices. We go, not to create unity, but to implore God to create it among us. The freedom and responsibility imposed upon us by this major step forward in the life of the Church rests on our generation. It is we who must make the ne cessary adjustments, acquire the requisite understanding, ab sorb the needed openess toward those from whom we are se parated without losing our own deep convictions. The prospect may well appear to many of us as a sizable task. This is no time jfor" pettirifess of fear. What is headed now are people of good will in every church, people con scious of their commitment to the Lord's will for oneness among his followers, people courage ous enough to welcome the ma jor demands that this commit ment makes upon them. ‘Good’, ‘Bad’ Unions Janus, the Roman gentleman after whom this month is named, was a god with two heads-one looking forward and the other backward. Recent news stories seem to put the labor movement in the same straits. The forward looking union is -of all people-those “terrible” Teamsters. The Peck's Bad Boys of the labor movement have al ready built a stunning housing center for the aging in Mill Creek. Now the announcement that Teamster officials are in volved in the multi-million dollar complex of hospital, nursing home, housing and ancillary ser vices in the Page-Hodiamont area promises to be a solid anchor that might check the downstream drift of the whole West End. Unfortunately, while the “bad” unions are doing good, the “good” unions insist upon per petuating injustice and working against the best interests of the community. Not only do restric tive union practices close the doors of certain building trades unions to Negroes and some other minorities, now a number of the AFL-CIO building trades unions threaten work on the Gate way Arch because an independent plumbers union which does ad mit Negroes has .been hired. In effect, the Negro is told ‘ ‘You can’t join our AFL-CIO union, and we won't work with any other union.” And then union officials can be quoted as piously insist ing that their decision “was not motivated by any considerations of race, color, or creed.” The backward looking unions had better become inward look ing and examine their policies - and their consciences. Is George Meany too busy speaking about ending racial discrimination in unions to check into this farce? Is Walter Reuther too busy lead ing parades in Selma to demon strate against injustice in his own union? Has the federal gov ernment expended so much time and effort examining the real and imagined misdeeds of the Team sters that it allows the AFL-CIO to be above the law? We ask again as we have asked before, is the magnificent arch to be a monument to intolerance and prejudice, or is it truly to signify the new spirit of St. Louis, offering to all its citizens real equality of opportunity and not only empty words? ST. LOUIS REVIEW Blueprint for Peace GEORGIA PINES Friend Comes Forth BY FR. DONALD KIERNAN THE FOLLOWING letter received from a reader is a comment on last week’s article entitled: NEEDED. . . .some friends. I print it this week hoping that the reader will en joy his comments as much as I did. Dear Father Kiernan, Needed-some friends. Unless I am mistaken, this is the second com ment you feel you have to make about inconside rate litterbugs, some possibly your own parish ioners, causing the rectory’s front lawn to look like the backside of a grocery store. You are upset and, although I have not been known for gi ving enthusiastic support to every thought you vent in your chronicle, this time I am truly sympathetic.. Just to get my facts, straight, 1 called the Atlanta Police, and was told that, indeed, it is illegal to throw litter on the city streets. I pressed the gendarme at the other end to specify whether or not he “could" give a tic ket to a person he saw throw ing trash on the street. His answer was yes. He was ma nifestly non-plussed that a citizen would concern himself with such trivia and gave the impression that the last thing he would care to do would be to pounce like an avenging archangel on an ac tive litterbug. In making that phone call, I was thinking that maybe one of your policemen friends could be persuaded to hide in your driveway, catch a score of those hitherto anonymous litterbugs and pre sent them with a costly autograph. Make an ex ample. After all, if they think enough of you to make you their official,chaplain, they ought to be prepared to do something for your peace of mind. The point you develop in your epistle to the miscreants indicates, alas, that you are far from being purgatory-bent on punishment, or, if that word pains you as too harsh, retributive justice. It is reasonable to assume from your reference to the lazy unemployed that you would not go along with the judge who sentenced people caught tossing beer cans on a highway to spend as much time as necessary to pbllce-by hand-one mile of said thoroughfare. Technically, the City Sanitation-Department might not even be required or expected to clean up your private front lawn or mine. If they do it in small rural towns, it probably comes under the heading of gratuitous courtesy, along with convict labor and county material and equipment, but as the Highway Department afficionados would say, this is another story. Whether in village or city, the pastor is right fully entitled to complain about the sanitary state of the street but it seems to me that the front yard belongs strictly to his domain, ter- ritorially'lspeakirig ahd ho offensei How can I or anyone else “attack” and, in the long run, re-educate litterbugs? TTie habit is in grained too deeply. We may see the day when the litter law is en forced much more often on the interstate high ways than it has been, if only to gain standing or status at the court of Lady Bird. But this is hardly more than wishful thinking. For, if they balk at prosecuting punks who throw projectiles of all kinds from expressways bridges, how can we hope that they will ever get really miffed at otherwise decent citizens who make it a point to ignore the municipal trash barrels? How, then, can we keep our Pastor’s modest expanse of grass free from trash? These days, even at the parish level, our Great Society has "projects” for everyone. The C.Y.O. makes it their business to go and serenade the elderly. The Girls-Scouts for all I know, may have adop ted an orphanage in Lower Katanga. The St. Vincent de Paul Society have erected in the rear of the rectory a wooden structure of such colossal proportions that, the other day, I was standing right in front of it and could not see it. Our young people are often urged-rightly-to make some sa crifice, preferably at some personal inconveni ence. If you appealed to our kids at St. Anthony’s, even this European skeptic believes that some of them would not consider it incompatible with their immense dignity to devote afewminutes every day to the beautification of the lawn.of our and theirs popular curate. Girls too, not only boys. Exer cise in humility. Jesus was nottoogoodfor wash ing some of his contemporaries’s feet, was He? Would I do it? Yes, I would, would not mind a bit doing it, say Saturday morning. I may be the least orthodox of your parishioners but that sort of thing is right up my alley, not because I am “nice” but because I am a maniac for order and neatness. CRISIS OF CONSCIENCE A STRANGE CASE Concerning Fr. DePauw BY GERARD E. SHERRY THE STRANGE case of self-styled head of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement in the United States, Father Gommar A. DePauw, gets stranger and stranger. From our various wire services, I have been able to compile a pre face but the final chapter is yet to be told. While a pro fessor at Mount St. Mary Semi nary in Balti more, he had cri ticized liturgical reforms, charged that “pro- gessive extremists” were trying to “Protes tantize" the Catholic Church, and held that the “English Mass’, accompanied by congregational singing, was “no longer the sacrament of Cal vary but a songfest with the overtones of a hootenanny”. Finally, he was directed by Cardinal Shehan, his archbishop, to disassociate himself from the movement. The prelate, a member of the Vatican Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, held that the CTM was “contrary to the best interests of the Church in this country”. Father DePauw acceded to the cardinal’s di rective and went briefly to New York to turn over command of the organization to a "Father X”, never officially identified. Although he was no longer officially associated with the CTM, he wrote frequently (largely letters to the editor) on the subject, generally in response to criti cism. SINCE HIS transfer to Baltimore from Ghent, Belgium, Father DePauw has twice asked trans fer from the archdiocese — first to Yungchow, China, and now to Tivoli in Italy. REAPINGS AT RANDOM i I His application for “incardination” to the China See was denied by the archdiocese of 4,000 Catholics — out of a population of 3.4 million — is on the China mainland, controlled by the Mao Communist regime. Its bishop is in exile. The archdiocese said the “conditions for transfer” were not proper. It is presumed that Father DePauw sought assignment to the bishop in exile, not to the diocese where he could not possibly serve. In July when Cardinal Shehan prepared to trans fer him from the seminary to a large parish in Baltimore, as assistant pastor, Father DePauw asked to accompany Bishop Blaise Kurz, O.F.M., Prefect Apostolic of Yungchow, to the Vatican Council as a guest expert, Cardinal Shehan gave hjs permission. ^ 9lll I0 V.sil .uiw i*u ’’ ■’ fLSfnuri h *:i o In Rome, Father DePauw asked the cardinal if he could transfer to the Diocese of Tivoli. According to an archdiocesan statement, the cardinal agreed; it added that the priest could have leave to arrange a transfer to Tivoli “or any other diocese”. “IF UNSUCCESSFUL”, in transfer efforts, the statement said, Father DePauw could serve as a priest in a Baltimore parish on the condition that he disassociate himself from the Catholic Traditionalist Movement. While in Rome for the Council, Father De Pauw told newsmen, he took his case to Cardinal Ottaviani. “I fought back and I won”, he said. “Cardi nal Ottaviani — not the Ottaviani the conserva tive but the arbiter of theological orthodoxy — told me there was nothing wrong in my posi tion and encouraged me to go ahead”. NEWSMEN were told that Cardinal Ottaviani arranged the transfer to the Tivoli diocese which, as part of the See headed by the Pope as Bis hop of Rome, comes under the supervision of the Holy See. Presumably, he would not have to work in Tivoli — like a soldier on “detached ser vice”, he would belong to Tivoli for administra tive purposes while operating the Catholic Tra ditionalist Movement out of New York head quarters. What is so strange about the whole business is that in an interview given by the bishop of Tivoli, the Italian Prelate said that Cardinal Ottaviani’s action was taken with the recommen dation of Francis Cardinal Spellman of New York. And Father DePauw in a recent interview in New York itimated that he had the approval of the New York Archdiocese to direct the CTM from there. Cardinal Spellman has emphatically denied (a) recommending Father DePauw (b) giving him permission to operate within his jurisdiction (c) that he supports the Traditionalist movement. Your World And Mine BY GARY MACEOIN "NO REAL CHANGE occured in the political situation in Spain during 1965. Behind Franco, we still have a vacuum. The Minister for Tourism has done a magnificent whitewash job for external consumption. Censorship and other authoritarian laws have been relaxed on paper. But there has been no reality.” improvement in the Such is the devastating sum ming-up just given me by a priests who holds a top job in Catholic publishing in Spain. His conclusions are supported by priests and laymen from different social strata and work backgrounds. It is generally agreed that the economic sit uation improved last year. While there was labor unrest as in previous years, most of the workers have reached a point where they are more in terested in food than freedom. “Years of hard ship have had their effect,” one preist told me. “And the regime knows how to distract the masses with radio, television, bull fights and football.” UNIVERSITY students are currently the leaders in the fight to liberalize the regime. Although police pressure in 1965 was greater thanfor some years, they were not intimidated. Even the risk of expulsion from the univsersity, which means the closing of all doors to a career, no longer seems to frighten them. A major current issue is the campaign for free dom of association. Last month, 2,500 students of Madrid University passed several resolutions bearing on this subject. They described the pre sent law, under which an official union controlled (CONTINUED ON PAGE 5) To further cloud the whole business, it is reported that Bishop Faveri of Tivoli will not accept Father DePauw. What is more, a spokes man for Cardinal Shehan of Baltimore has stated that the only way Father DePauw could get per mission to transfer to another diocese was through being accepted by another bishop and actually working in the diocese to which he would be lncardinated. OBVIOUSLY, the original arrangement in Ti voli would have been possible if Father De Pauw had had any intention of staying in that Italian diocese, doing parochial work or anything else desired by that bishop. Alas, it appears all too clear that the move was simply made to give him a base outside of Tivoli to promote the Traditionalist Movement in the United States without interference from his former bishop. It was not destined to work. However, there are certain points about this case which give cause for concern. Here is a priest who is told by his bishop to cease and desist doing something which his bishop disap- CONTINUED ON PAGE 5