Newspaper Page Text
THURSDAY, JUNE 30, 1966 GEORGIA BULLETIN PAGE 5
TO THEE / WILL GIVE THE
KEYS OF THE KINGDOM
OF HEAVEN'* THIS
CONTEMPORARY STATUE
BRINGS THE IMAGE RIGHT
UP TO DATE- ST PETER i
IS SHOWN HOLDING i
^JERUSALEM 15 YEARS PREVIOUSLY
jAN ANCIENT MS. IN THE LIBRARY OF*
YORK MINSTER, ENGLAND, CONTAINS
TH/S UNUSUAL AND IMAGINATIVE
ACCOUNT OF THE COMPOSITION OT
the apostle's creed:
PETER SAID BELIEVE IN GOD THE
FATHER.". . . .
ANDREW SAID -AND IN JESUS CHRIST.'
JAMES WE GREATER SAID — WHO WAS
CONCEIVED BY THE HOLY GHOST.".
.. .WITH EACH OF WE TWELVE ADDING
A LINE UP TD THE FINAL ONE OF
MATTHEW ~AND LIFE EVERLASTING.
o4M£N *.
" %0 l oqp spio
°°%rpcrc*
1o S
\tNT
AfiC
HAD
fife*ggp
|f'V* WHO
^ TAKEN IT FROM
//K vv
A” V *
First bishop IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE
WAS FRAY JUAN DE ZUMARRAGA, A FRANCISCAN
WHO CAME FROM SPAIN IN THE FIRST HALF
OF THE /6Z* CENTURY TO BECOME
ARCHBISHOP OF MEXICO.
COUNCIL AND A G.I.
Your World And Mine
■" ■ By Gary LfarTT^in
Americans are not easily stirred up by a
theoretic Issue. When they come face to face
with a concrete moral conflict, however, their
sense of right and wrong does not yield to that
of any other people. We are pretty bored when
the Vatican Council Iasi Pall was splitting rails
— as It seemed to matiy *Le over conscientious
objection. “Our law is clear,” I was told more
than once. “This is a problem for the Italians
who can’t conceive of a private, whether In the
army or in the Church, using his own hea<
He does what they tell him.”
It has been said that this is the principle
established at the Nuremberg trial of Nazi
war criminals. One can see the relationship,
but it is not the same. Insofar as the Nuremberg
trials established a principle, it was that one
cannot plead the orders of one’s superior as a
defense for commission of acts- “In violation of
the law of nations." The Vatican Council principle
Is twofold. One must judge for himself whether
the orders of the superior are lawful. If the
judgment is negative, one must refuse to obey.
Adam R. Weber, Jr., has
changed all that. He Is a 24-
year-old Negro from New Or
leans, an ex-seminarian. He
is not a conscientious objec
tor in the United States un
derstanding of die term. He
does not believe that war is
necessarily wrong in every
situation. He would subscribe
to the statement of the Coun
cil that “as long as the danger of war remains
and there Is no competent and sufficiently power
ful authority at the International level, governments
cannot be denied the right to legitimate defense,
once every means of peaceful settlement has been
exhausted.”
But in the very same paragraph 79 of the Con
stitution on the Church in the Modern World, the
Council spells out In detail the limitations to the
right of defense in regard both to the objectives
sought and to the means permissible In the pur
suit of those objectives. And, Inline with the Coun
cil’s constant stress on the Importance of human
dignity and the responsibility of the free human
person, it declares expllcitlythat each Individual
has to judge for himself whether these conditions
are being met. If his conscience tells him that
they are not, he may not cooperate. “Blind obe
dience cannot excuse those who yield” to orders
commanding actions they judge criminal.
Casuistic theologians of the pre-Vatican II era
used to say that in case of doubt about the legiti
macy of a particular war, one might properly
assume that the government’s position was not
unjust — the position of one’s own government, of
course. I do not see how any theologian can con
tinue today to feed this baby food to adult Chris
tians.
In case of doubt, one’s moral duty is to study
the available evidence regarding both the nature
and the conduct of the particular war In the light
of paragraphs 79, 80 and 81 of the Constitution
on the Church In the Modern World. Blind obe
dience is out In the civil area no less than in the
religious, in which the Council explicitly reject
ed it In paragraph 43 of the same Constitution.
Fortunately, our media of communications are to
day so highly developed that, in spirt of govern
ment efforts to deceive them and their readers,
the Christian who wants to obey the Church has
substantial opportunity to weigh the evidence.
I am not suggesting for a moment that Adam
R. Weber, Jr., has reached an objectively cor
rect decision on the morality of killing Vietna
mese. The Issues he raises for us are entirely
different ones. I have written the President of
the United States urging that, as commander-in-
chlef, he give this young soldier a cltationfor his
bravery In obeying his conscience, and that as pre
sident he Initiate legislation to bring our law into
conformity with the conscience of civilization.
MacEoln
Guest Editorial
IN THE JUNE Issue of Una Sancta Lutheran
theologian Carl E. Braaten of theLutheranSchool
of Theology in Chicago urges Protestants to let
the Reformation sink into history and return to
their ’’ecclesiastical homeland,” the Roman Ca
tholic Church. On the face of it this Is an absurd
plea and one potentially mischievous to the ecu
menical movement. Most Protestants do not rhy
me “home” and ’’Rome”, do not feel or believe
Letters To Editor
(CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4.)
Whatever programs have been offered (summer
schools and Parents' groups.
Whatever programs have been offered (summer
school, camp and park activities) are made known
to the parochial schools, and all children are
Invited to participated.
Out outlook Is changing and developing, but
perhaps, unconsciously we are still clinging
to our ghettos. We need to become part of
our community, showing our love and concern
for all people.
MRS. EDWARD G. HOLMES.
ATLANTA
that they are as Protestants exiles In a foreign
land, do not see even in updated Catholicism a
hospitable climate for their Christian views and
do not want or Intend to "return”. To suggest
to them that as Christians they have the status
of aliens Insults their faith; to Imply that they are
“Illegitimate offspring,^to use Braaten’s phrase,
attributes to their spiritual forefathers a pro
fligacy of which they were not guilty and should
not be accused; to identify Roman Catholicism
as the one true church and Protestant denomina
tions as provisional ecclesiastical orders and to
beseech the latter to submerge themselves In the
former imputes to the ecumenical movement a
sinister design. Braaten discovers In Protestan
tism today ”a new birth of catholicity.” True
and good. Others have discovered in Catholicism
a new openness toward contents and forms once
thought distinctively Protestant. True and good.
All observers have noted the warming of the two
faiths toward each other In sweet charity and
cooperation. True and good. Many Catholics and
Protestants have the vision of one church emer
ging—In the distant future—from the many, pre
serving and merging all that the Holy Spirit
has taught each and honoring the oneness of
Christ In a unity beyond Protestant or Catholic.
If true, then good. Meanwhile, talks of “return
ing” are odious, perhaps dangerous.
THE CHRISTIAN CENTURY
—CDOSAIC—
A Jew In Christian t/.S.
■ | By LEON PAUL *
"After all, this is a Christian country I* ’ Each time a Catholic
would say this to me, 1 would feel as if 1 had been bit with a
clenched flstl
And it has been said to me, time after time, after a lecture,
or during my courses on 'TheChurch and die Jews” or follow
ing the publication of one of my articles or
pamphlets. And it always comes from Cath
olics who simply do not understand their
Faith, for one thing, and who resent the
slightest preference — or even a gesture of
simple equality—on the part of Catholics
(or Americans) toward the Jews.
These Catholics act as though preferential
treatment must be accorded Christiana In
these United States because “after all, this
is a Christian countryl*’ Christmas plays
and pageants, Nativity scenes In public schools or on city prop
erty, St. Patrick’s Day parades and other expressions of Chris
tian belief and tradition in public are perfectly alright, and in
keeping with the spirit of American democracy because “after
all, this is a Christian countryl’’—but let the Jews try to ex
press their loud cry from some of those so-called Christians:
“No!, Not—after all, this is a CHRISTIAN country!*'
This resentment, this bitterness, this unwillingness to permit
the Jews public expression of their beliefs and traditions, this
nagging criticism over Jewish resentment when Christian be
liefs are forced upon Jewish children in public schools, no mat
ter how beautiful and sacred these beliefs may be to Christians,
this unchristian, unAmerican, undemocratic behavior of Chris
tians toward Jews in this country has resulted in misunderstand
ing and resentment and even hatred on the part of Jews toward
what they think is the Church.
For many Catholics, it seems to be a very difficult thing to
Imagine what it is to be a Jew in this country. They might think
that we are simply—fellow Americans. Not so. We should be.
But being Jewish makes a big difference.
Now it will be a little easier to understand what It is like
for a Jew to live in our democratic society in the midst of
a predominantly Christian-oriented population. Rabbi Arthur
Gilbert’s new book just published by Sheed & Ward is a mile
stone in Christian-Jewish understanding. “A Jew In Christian
America” (May 1966/$4.95) is Must reading for every
Catholic, and I would include every Protestant also.
Published, I am happy to say, by a Catholic publisher, this
book will open the eyes—and I hope the hearts—of many. It
contains articles written over a period of many years, by a
Jewish rabbi who came In contact with Christianity early In
his life, In Philadelphia, through his best boyfriend and neigh
bor, Timmie McGrath. He talks aboutTimmle and the Catholics
he knew in the first chapter, ’The Gentiles In My Life.” I
know you will enjoy this chapter very much—it Is most heart
warming.
Rabbi Gilbert tells about an incident following an interracial,
interreligious youth conference sponsored by a Jewish organiza
tion and the Protestant Council of N.Y. “On our way home, a
Negro boy with whom I had become friendly sat next to me.
Pointing to my collegiate, tweed sport jacket, he said, 'Rabbi
Gilbert, you sure don't look like no rabbi. Man, you look like a
bopster.* Here, all the time, 1 had thought of them as 'Juve
nile delinquents,’ while they were saying, 'Dig that crazy
rabbi.’ Together we had learned alesson. Difference frightens.
Stereotype enslaves. We reach some degree of humanity only
when we overcome the barriers between us and know each other
as persons,*
Q. I see the wisdom of having priests not marry, but I want to
know if we may expect the future to see deacons marry and raise
families? Would not married deacons give the Church "super-
laymen,” men In position to know, guide and act in problems of
labor-management, parish-family economics? Wouldn’t they bet
ter link the world of priest to die world of breadwinner, citi
zen of the world?
A. In spite of your challenging rhetorical questions I do not
expect to find married deacons at work In the United States until
many years have gone by. They may be in
other countries, but the two traditional pillars
of the Church in our country are the celibacy
of the clergy and condemnation of birth con
trol for the laity. The latter seems a mite
wobbly of late, so we cannot weaken the
other.
I presume you know that the Vatican Coun
cil did not authorize deacons to marry; it
rather permitted the ordaining of married
men to the diaconate in those countries In
which the bishops recommend it and the pope
•••
Q. In your column you answered a Methodist lady’s question
about Purgatory. Your quotations from St. Matthew, St. Luke
and II Maccabees were most cogent, but I wondered why you did
not quote the Apostles Creed, since most Protestant sects
recite it:
“He descended Into hell, etc." Certainly not the place of the
lost soulk, out of which there is no redemption, but rather a
place, call it purgatory, or Limbo orwhatnot, where the suffer
ing souls were detained to satisfy the justice of God, since noth
ing defiled can enter heaven.
A. There is considerable difference between the Limbo of the
Fathers to which Christ descended and Purgatory where souls
are purified. To the best of our knowledge the Limbo of the
Fathers ceased to exist either with our Lord’s Resurrection or
with His Ascension into heaven. Purgatory will last until the
final judgment.
1 prefer to think of Purgatory as a place where sanctified
souls grow more perfect in the love of Goodness, rather than a
place where God’s exigent justice is satisfied. It Is the God of
love and forgiveness who redeemed us; it is the God of grace
and generosity who sanctifies us. The God demanding Justice
would send us to hell and be done with us.
Q. In Catholic papers and magazines we have heard that a few
theologians believe that Jesus Christ did not know He was die
Son of God until after His Resurrection. We are discussing fois
in class, and would like you opinion on it.
A. This question is signed by two grade school students!
I have not heard of any Catholic theologians who hold such an
opinion. It would certainly be contrary to traditional Catholic
throught, and contrary also to die apparent meaning of many
words of Jesus as quoted intheGospel, e.g. “land die Father
are one. . . .No one knows the Father exept the Son... .Do you
not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?"
Msgr. Conway
agrees.
Paul
ARNOLD VIEWING
6 Stagecoach 9 Is So-So
By James Arnold
Remakes of classic films are usually about
as successful as a second meal from one pot of
spaghetti. The reason Is that the greatness
of a movie rarely comes from its situation or
story, but rather from the personal genius or
luck of a director. And that is the first thing
lost in a remake.
“Stagecoach", perhaps, was not much to be
gin with. As made by John Ford in 1939, It
was a highly contrived tale
about a motley collection of
types on a Sand-clogged journ
ey through Indian country.
While it had good action se
quences and established the
high-budget western as a per
manent fixture, “Stagecoach"
was not to be compared with
other Ford films or with such
classic oaters as "Shane,’’
“High Noon" or ‘The Gun- Arnold
fighter."
If the new “Stagecoach,” produced by
Martin Rackin and directed by Gordon Douglas,
had been made more than 25 years ago, It
might have aroused some enthusiasm. Today
its plot seems as anachronistic as an old Col
lier’s magazine story, and its two main action
themes — the Indian chase and the Rlngo Kid’s
revenge - are made to seem fresh only by a
heavy-handed resort to explicit violence.
Producer Rackin doesn't deserve too muefe
sympathy, since he has already confessed in
interviews that his main concern is making a
dollar. He has given his director only an ordi
nary nuts-and-bolts script and a box-office
cast that includes only one real actor (vete
ran Van Heflin as the competent, almost too-
honest marshal).
The situation, recall, is a kind of lowbrow
“Ship of Fools” The passenger list includes
such hallowed stereotypes as the shady-lady-
who-is-reformed-by kindness (Ann-Margret),
the alcoholic philosophe»physician (Bing
Crosby), the timid easterner (Red Buttons),
the overbearing coward (Bob Cummings), the
tinhorn gambler with a noble past (Michael
Connors), the strong-silent westerner (Alex
Cord), and the delicate lady-who-is-tougher-
than-she-looks (Stefanie Powers).
There is no danger of getting lost in a plot,
since each character wants only one thing, and
wants it Intensely. Crosby wants booze, and
Buttons (a prim liquor salesman) wants re
lief from a cold. Cord wants to get the bad buy
who killed his father, and Heflin wants to put
Cord (an escaped convict) safely back in JaiL
Connors wants to protect Miss Powers, because
she is a Southern lady who reminds him of his
innocent youth back on the plantation. Moat
single-minded of all la Cummings, who is
carrying a satchel with a fortune in stolen
money and keeps jabbering at everyone to keep
going, Indians or no Indians.
It is Impossible to take these people serious
ly. Buttons plays his man for laughs, and
Cummings is funny playing It straight. Old
Bing, stuck in a part a thousand actors have
played before him, just can't put enough rasp
In those pear-shaped tones. Adding an un
helpful comic note is Slim Pickens, as the
salty coach driver who is either frightened or
complaining.
Ann-Margret, who Is moat kindly described
perhaps as a lovely kid with a little pipe: of
a voice, is simply miscast. If one must ac
cept the premise that a tough dance-hall girl
will become a lady if she Is treated like one,
it becomes moving and poignant only in a con
text of mature despair. Miss A-M la still too
lively and fresh to provide the decadence ne
cessary for reform. Cord showed promise in
“Synanon," but here he la so absolutely blank
he makes John Wayne look like Sir Laurence
Olivier.
The new “Stagecoach” doesn’t fuss about
with moralising. The bad girl, the drinker and
the gambler all have golden hearts; the only
evil person, in a pitiful way, Is the thief. When
the time comes for revenge, the law fails, and
the strong man must go in alone and clean the
rascals out. Vengeance is not only justified,
but the baddies die so deliciously they bring
the audience positive pleasure in their agony.
Rarely has there been such direct, chop-em-
up violence, unredeemed by sensitivity or poe
try. In the opening sequence, an army troop
is massacred in technicolor, with axes in the
forehead, bodies dragged through fire, etc.
A few minutes later In a barroom brawl, two
soldiers beat each other to death. Later we get
a loving look at another 20 or so massacred
bodies, and during the Indian attack, the red
skins fall as if they were diving for silver dol
lars. Again there Is the urge to laugh and
cheer at all this mayhem; if it Is entertain
ment, so is a public hanging.
Director Douglas has expertly shot the chase
sequence, which lasts about 10 full minutes,
utilizing every kind of camera placement:
helicopter, on and under the coach and the rac
ing horses, tracking madly alongside, and sta
tionary (allowing horses and coach to pass di
rectly Into and over the lens).
OLD AND NEW
Unrest In
By Gary Will*
It has been a hard year for the Catholic col
lege. St. John’s, Catholic University, IXiquesne,
San Diego College for Women, St. Thomas
In St. Paid, Loyola of Los Angeles—all had
disturbances that drew national attention. So
did several seminaries. And, in other places,
potential crises reached the boiling point but
did not bubble over.
At least one af these crises
were caused by administrative
Ineptness so peculiarly imagi
native that It cannot be con
sidered typical of anything.'
Others, perhaps, were caused
by stray hotheads on the
faculty. Perhaps none of the
cases mentioned Is fully ty
pical of die problems Catholic
educators face. But they re
main symptomatic, nonethe
less: the attention they got, the support ex
pressed for both sides, the minatory entrail-
readlng, show that educators elsewhere were
sympathetically vibrating to these danger sig
nals.
It would be wrong, I think, to relate the tur
moil at Catholic ^schools to student unrest
on other campuses. There are many differences,
best symbolized by one fact: it was student
unrest on the other campuses. At Catholic
schools, the restlessness has been, in almost
every case, expressed by the faculty. If the
students were whirlpooled into the matter at all,
It was usually as allies of the teachers In their
protest.
What Is making Catholic faculty members
unhappy? Perhaps as good a place as any to
find an answer to that question is Georgetown
University. It had troubles this year, though they
did not attract much attention outside Washing
ton. In die capital, there was gossip that George
town Is bleeding good teachers at every pore.
The Washington Post called It Georgetown’s
“brain drain.” An extraordinarily high num
ber of those leaving are rumored to be tenured
members of the faculty. But most attention was
given to an untenured mathematics teacher,
whose departure caused a “study-ln”. The local
AAUP is said to be unhappy that efforts are
not made to keep exceptional men who get good
offers; a sludge of teachers who have not been
wooed by competing Institutions collects In the
senior layers of some departments.
In the department I know best the school had
four bright laymen teachers four years ago
when I was lilting In Washington. The depart
ment’s "majors” did very well in national
contests, and won a disproportionate number
of awards and fellowships for higher study.
But two years ago the department was cut in
half, and the remaining members were warned
they might have to double In other departments
(foe result of a curriculum standardization that
was cutting out majors in “unpopular” areas,
like astronomy.) Both men are disappointedly
leaving the school this year, their places sup-
Colleges
piled by eleventh-hour hiring that means every
member of foe department will be 10 new
comer to foe campus next term. One bright
student transferred schools when he heard about
this break In continuity.
I asked faculty members who were leaving
what discouraged them most. They answered
that It was not clerical “tyranny*' over the lay
faculty (Indeed, foe standards are In some ways
too lax, not too strict), but a simple lack of
communication. The layman is not “in the
community’’—a community whose ties are more
"horizontal” (stretching out to other Jesuit
communities within the province) than “ver-
ticle" (reaching down Into the life of foe parti
cular university).
Religious orders can run colleges very well
(as some schools show). But most of them are
coping with tremendous problems In attempting
this task. They cannot go out to seek the best
man for any job; they must rely on the members
of their order within a certain locale (and
religious orders usually attract people whose
ideals and aspirations are not particularly ad
ministrative). The superior of such an order
cannot concentrate on the good of one campus if
he must spread the talent to achieve a kind of
balance In the schools and other works of the
order.
Just recently I heard teachers at a small
Catholic school express the fear that their
president was getting “too good”—good enough
for his order to shift him to a “trouble spot”
or to some more prestigious Institution. Others
resent foe flow through the school of the order’s
young men, who are “apprenticed” in various
places, but not hired to stay and mature In
the department that puts up with their Initial ef
forts. These things lead to an unsettled atmos
phere: one teacher said that In five years he
had seen almost every conceivable fluctuation
in relations with the administration. Situations
of promise do not develop, sound areas crum
ble overnight, strange unforeseeable shifts are
always taking {dace; and there is little the lay
faculty can do about this. 1 cannot vouch for
these Impressions; but I do not think they were
foe reaction of an embittered man, just a
wearied one. He said he would never teach In
a Catholic school again. Living dangerously
with constantly surprise Is exciting to foe
young; but the charm wears off.
It used to be that the best students of Catholic
lower education went to good Catholic colleges.
Now foe best are, more often than not, going
to non-Cafoollc colleges. And In the future
there may be fewer high schools supplying the
colleges with “natural” candidates. Perhaps
something like this Is taking place at the faculty
level, too — foe better teachers drifting away
to non-Catholic schools. Clearly, Increased
lay control of some sort is a crying need In
most Catholic colleges. (Fordham seems to have
made important strides In this direction). And
probably more drastic changes will be neces
sary as welL
Wills