Newspaper Page Text
BY ORDER GF POPE PAUL
PAGE 5—August 19,1971
To Go To Synod Bishops
By Father Leo E. McFadden
(NC News Service)
VATICAN CITY (NC) -
An extensive historical study
of the priesthood and
celibacy which concludes that
they should not be separated
will soon be sent to the
delegates to the coming world
synod of bishops at the
express command of Pope
Paul VI.
The priesthood is one of
two topics the month-long
synod, opening here Sept. 30,
will consider. The other
subject is justice in the world.
The study is a series of
scholarly articles based on
biblical, historical and
theological sources. Entitled
“The Priesthood and
Celibacy,” the articles were
published in book form at the
C at holic University of
Louvain, Belgium.
A Vatican source indicated
that the Pope admired the
work very much and wished
it sent as background material
to all delegates. Originally
published in French, the
AND REVIEWS
book has since been
translated into Italian and
Spanish. At the urgent
bidding of Pope Paul, a team
of English-speaking nuns is
hard at work on an English
version and will soon have it
completed.
Edited by 74-year-old Prof.
Joseph Coppens, the book
considers the priesthood from
Old Testament times down to
the pronouncements of the
Second Vatican Council and
the writings of the present
Pope. Included in this
panorama are such diverse
topics as the early Christian
notion of the priesthood, the
spiritual writings of Cardinal
Desiree Mercier, the Belgian
philosopher and ecumenist
who died in 1926, the
encyclicals of Popes Pius X,
Pius XI and Pius XII and the
speeches and writings of Pope
John XXIII.
The book corroborates the
thinking of Vatican II by
summarizing the priesthood:
“The mandate of continuing
the salvific work of Christ is
made up of three elements:
that of prolonging the
redemptive act par
excellence, that is, the
sacrificial passion and
resurrection; that of
prolonging the message of
salvation;.. .and that of
prolonging the infusion of
grace through the gift of the
Holy Spirit.”
Film Classifications
ON ANY SUNDAY
(Cinema 5) Bruce Brown
gives sport motorcycle racing
the same gleeful
documentary eye that so
entranced the millions who
saw his surfing epic
ENDLESS SUMMER. The
format here is approximately
the same, with graceful
telephoto and zoom lensing
of the weekend adventures of
a couple of amateur bike
racers traveling the
international circuits. Steve
McQueen, who put up some
money for the project and
who is himself a competent
motorcyclist, makes a brief
and exciting appearance.
Brown’s own enthusiastic
narration is perhaps too-hip
in the casual California style,
but his cameras never fail to
capture the appeal of a fast
and unusual sport. (A-I)
THE WITCHMAKER
(Excelsior) A college crowd
goes a-haunting in murky
Louisiana swamps and run
into a satanic blood-letter
named Luther the Berserk.
Only adults hooked on this
sort of hokum need bother
with this WITCHMAKER.
(A-III)
BILLY JACK (Warner
Bros.) suffers from acute
missionary zeal in its
depiction of a free school for
Southwest dropouts versus
the super-bigoted and
reactionary factions in the
nearby town. Protector of the
kids, who virtually beg for
trouble, is one Billy Jack, a
stoic half-breed who knows
Karate and, if that fails, can
split hairs with his Winchester
repeater. Stone-faced Tom
Laughlin plays the title role,
and a host of semi-and
non-actors fill supporting
roles. The only surprise is the
industry’s GP rating, which
either overlooks rape,
seduction, sadism, obscene
language and, yes, cruelty to
animals, or simply thinks
these are fit subjects for
young eyes and ears. (B)
THE LOVE MACHINE
(Columbia) Jacqueline
Susann’s sensationally banal
“guess who?” novel about sex
and corporate in-fighting in
the television biz is now an
equally banal movie. John
Phillip Law is the man with
the mechanical nickname,
Jackie Cooper and Robert
Ryan are his ruthless business
colleagues, David Hemmings
his effete confidante, and
Dyan Cannon only one of the
innumerable women who
helped him earn his dubious
title. The film offers little by
way of reality, but plenty of
innuendo and leer. Most of
the material is pure pulp, but
at least two sequences - a
group shower and a brutal
beating - qualify as
objectionable. (B)
YOG (American
International) will not quite
leave you agog, but it should
provide some amusing
moments for parents
unwitting enough to find
themselves trapped with the
kiddies for a matinee horror
fest. Actually, this Japanese
production is never scary,
only unintentionally funny,
as the giant octopedes and
fleshy crabs boil out of the
sea to scare the island natives.
(A-I).
RECENT NCOMP FILM
CLASSIFICATIONS
YOG (American
International) - A-I
No Drums, No Bugles
(Cinerama) -- A-III
Christa (American
International) -- C
Black Peter (Altura) -
A-III
Figures in a Landscape
(National General) - A-III
The Omega Man (Warners)
- A-III
The Witchmaker
(Excelsior) - A-III
The House That Screamed
(American International) - B
The Love Machine
(Columbia) - B
Romance of a Horsethief
(Allied Artists) - B
The book also studies
priestly celibacy in the light
of the ancient tradition of the
Latin-rite Church. After a
meticulous survey of celibacy
through the centuries, the
editor concludes:
“Praise of celibacy,
founded on the most secure
and lofty data of Christian
tradition, both biblical and
patristic .. .seems to us to
have ensured for itself a
justification which protects it
from any pertinent
objection.”
Still another conclusion of
the book is that many times
in the Church’s history some
have called for a separation of
celibacy from the priestly
ministry. Speaking of the
present day, the book states
that some are tempted “to
return to less brilliant
conditions of existence,” that
is, to a married clergy.
Still, the book contends,
this has not been the opinion
of the “ecclesial elite through
the ages, the saints whom the
Christian people recognized
at all times .. .as the most
worthy interpreters to be
heeded in the Church.”
Italian Jesuit Father
Roberto Tucci, editor of the
Jesuit review, Civilta
Cattolica, in reviewing the
book, observed:
A — Section I — Morally Unobjectionable for General Patronage
A — Section II — Morally Unobjectionable for Adults Adolescents
A — Section III — Morally Unobjectionable for Adults
A — Section IV — Morally Unobjectionable for Adults, Reservations
B — Morally Objectionable in Part for All
C — Condemned
“This collection of studies
is an indispensable instrument
for consultation and a
veritable mine of
information . . .It is very
beneficial to have such a
work at one’s disposal on
the eve of a synod which will
be expressly concerned with
the ministerial priesthood in
all its aspects.”
TV IN CHURCH - Tony Sandler and Ralph Young, better
known as the singing team of “Sandler and Young” used the
Cathedral in St. Paul, Minnesota, recently as a setting for one
segment of a television special to be aired later this year. Above,
they lip-synch “Ave Maria” while the camera crew records the
scene. (NC PHOTO courtesy Catholic Bulletin)
TV Movie Reviews
Sunday, August 22, 9:00
p.m. - SHOOT LOUD,
LOUDER . . .1 DON’T
UNDERSTAND (1966) -
The most intriguing aspect of
this venture is figuring out
just what the title means.
Otherwise, there is little
interest in the story of an
Italian Walter Mitty type
(Marcello Mastroianni) and
his unsuspecting involvement
in a real murder. Raquel
Welch is on hand to provide
additional and unnecessary
fantasy. For adults (ABC).
Monday, August 23, 9:00
p.m. - EL GRECO (1966) -
Mel Ferrer and Rosanna
Schiaffino star in a punk
melodramatic romance based
loosely on the life of the
great 16th century Spanish
master. As usual, art is
secondary to the presentation
of the painter’s tempestuous
romance with a high-born
lady, and those looking for
insight into his temperament
had better look elsewhere.
The Toledo (Spain, not Ohio)
locations, however, provide a
pretty backdrop, in the same
way the painter’s works
provide occasional decoration
for the glossy production.
Melodramatic mush, and for
adult appetites. (ABC)
Monday, August 23, 9:00
p.m. - TRIPLE PLAY -
Repeat of a “world premiere”
television film is actually
three TV sit-com pilots strung
together and hosted by
toastmaster-clowns Dan
Rowan and Dick Martin.
Pulpy. (NBC)
Tuesday, August 24, 8:30
p.m. - THE SHERIFF -
Repeat of a made-for-tele-
vision drama set in the
contemporary West (it would
have taken guts to set it in
the South) finds black sheriff
Ossie Davis’s career
threatened by the racial
tensions that place his town
on the brink of explosion.
Crisis arises from a white
man’s attack on a black girl.
Davis’s real life wife Ruby
Dee co-stars, with support
from Moses Gunn, Kyle
Johnson. (ABC)
Tuesday, August 24, 9:00
p.m. - RANSOM FOR A
DEAD MAN - Yes, Virginia
ANOTHER rebroadcast of a
“world premiere” TV film.
This one concerns a nice lady
who kills ol’ hubby and
thenceforth tries to outwit
the law. The gal is a lawyer
herself, so she knows all the
loopholes that separate
justice from legality. Lee
Grant is nifty as the naughty
lady, Harold Gould is the
police inspector she
outflanks, and Peter Falk is
the tireless detective who just
won’t drop his hunch that she
did the dastardly deed. (NBC)
Saturday, August 28, 9:00
p.m. - THE UNSINKABLE
MOLLY BROWN (1964) -
Rolicking musical based on
Meredith Wilson’s smash
broadway play based on the
spirited biography found in
Gene Fowler’s “Timberline”
collection. Debbie Reynolds,
in the role created by Tammy
Grimes, deservedly won an
Oscar nomination for her
portrayal of the undaunted
frontier gal from Denver. A
1910 female Huck Finn who
flees her drab shanty
existence in Missouri for
adventure and riches in
frontier Denver, Molly Brown
finds romance (with Harve
Presnell) and a fortune in the
“Little Johnny” silvermine.
Unable to step into Denver
society because of her
boisterousness, Molly travels
to Europe and acquires
culture. Her return voyage
finds her on the ill-fated
Titanic, where her person,
like her spirits, proves
unsinkable. The film is full of
rousing songs, corny comedy,
and Peter Gennaro’s lively
choreography. Recommended
for ’most all. (NBC)
AN NC ANALYSIS
Church Law Revolution Quietly
By Patrick Riley
VATICAN CITY (NC) - If
overuse or plain abuse have
not stripped the word
“revolution” of all meaning,
then a revolution in Church
law is quietly under way.
Should this revolution
succeed it will turn the
Church’s image as a severely
authoritarian society upside
down, and put the Church
among the most genuinely
domocratic societies in the
world.
Should it succeed it will
make ordinary recourse to
Church courts simple and
potentially satisfactory,
rather than daunting and
probably self-defGating—as for
courts in most places.
This revolution goes by the
name of administrative law,
an unexciting term that has
warded off the curiosity of
journalists. That, plus the fact
that the Vatican’s published
report on administrative law
is in Latin, explains why this
revolutionary turn in the
current reform of church law
has gone unpublicized.
In a nutshell,
administrative law attempts
to forestall highhanded or
ill-informed acts in the
day-by-day administration of
the Church. It offers
workable remedies against
such acts.
Administrative law would
create a new system of
Church courts, parallel to the
present system. These
“administrative tribunals”
would hear grievances of a
less vital character. Their
procedural rules would be
more elastic and simplifying
and would speed up cases.
Appeals to these courts
would be grounded
principally on the failure of
the administrator-such as the
bishop or a deputy of the
bishop-to respect rules of
administrative procedure laid
down in this new legal
system.
These are among the
demands administrative law
would make of an
administrator:
-He must get all the
necessary information before
acting.
-He must consult those
concerned.
-He must give reasons for
his action.
There are other grounds
for appeal. For instance, if
the administrator abuses his
authority, or puts forward
specious reasons for his act.
Appeals can be made by
anyone who feels he is
oppressed. Thus an appeal
against the transfer of a
pastor can be made by the
pastor, by his parishioners, by
his successor, or by anyone
who claims to have an
interest in the affair, possibly
even his new parishioners.
Present channels of appeal
would not be closed. Appeals
could still be addressed to a
hierarchical superior, with the
Pope at the top, or to a
regular ecclesiastical court.
But here a key distinction
arises. If the appellant claims
that his RIGHTS have been
infringed, he normally would
appeal to a regular
ecclesiastical court. If the
appellant claims that his
interests have been damaged,
he normally would appeal to
an administrative tribunal.
No simple rule of thumb
exists to help distinguish
neatly and unfailingly
between rights and interests.
Jurists ordinarily content
themselves with saying that
an interest is a lesser right.
Roughly, rights stem from
the basic needs of the person
and, by extension, of society.
mi , ___ i , ,. i
me person needs co live, ana
therefore has a right to the
means of sustaining life. He
needs to find happiness, and
therefore, has a right to
pursue his own perfection.
Society requires
order - otherwise it is no
longer society-and therefore
needs certain civil, or
ecclesiastical, offices. Persons
filling these necessary offices
need and therefore have the
right to the means of doing
their job.
Interests on the other hand
derive not so much from
basic needs as from particular
ways of pursuing those needs.
Convenience and efficiency
enter here, since it is part of a
person’s interests to pursue
his needs conveniently and
efficiently. By the same
token a sense of personal
satisfaction enters the
picture.
Whatever the theoretical
differences between rights
and interests, the practical
consequences are felt soon
enough and sharply enough.
When one nstion puts its own
interests before the rights of
another nation, international
injustice arises and even war
can erupt. When the weight
of society puts the interests
of one group before the rights
of another group, injustice
arises, and the class struggle
conceived by Marx as the
very leaven of communism
begins to work through the
mass.
But the practical
consequence that has
prompted the Vatican to
consider creating a system of
administrative law is this:
That the same iron-clad
proofs that are indispensable
when rights are at stake
become disproportionately
heavy when interests are at
stake. This is a principal
reason why people shy away
from taking their grievances
to court. The Church’s
proposed system of
administrative law is an
attempt to remedy this
defect.
Of course, the notion that
lighter proofs suit lesser cases
is far from new. It was one of
roof c of fhc* F.ncflich
system of equity, now fused
into common law. Curiously
enough, medieval Church law
exerted a strong influence in
the creation of the system of
law known as equity, and
now Church law seems about
to borrow the principle of
equity back from the civil law
of those countries where the
principle is in force under a
system of administrative law.
Administrative law has
been part of the legal
framework of several South
European countries for about
a century, yet the suggestion
to incorporate it into Church
law came from the hierarchy
of the United States. Pope
Paul VI, taking up the
suggestion, created a special
commission (distinct from
the Commission for the
Revision of Canon Law), and
it held its first meeting at the
beginning of last year.
Will administrative law
make it? Will it become part
of the Church’s system of
justice?
At one time, wei^tit of
tradition would have been
against it. A system requiring
a superior to explain himself
ran counter to that “perfect”
obedience which had
animated the Church since it
first pulled itself together
from the stunning impact of
the Protestant Reformation.
But that has changed now.
Discussion, or dialogu'
between the men who give
orders and the men who
receive them has become the
norm. The kind of grievance
that administrative law would
remedy is being handled
countless times daily through
a newly established sense of
fair play.
Two dynamic principles
have come forward to heave
the new system into canon
law. The first is that the
obedience due Church
authorities—which is
prompted by faith and is the
soul of order-does not
dispense these authorities
from having good reasons for
their decisions. Nor does it
exempt those reasons from
miKlin onviifintr
pUUilV OV/lUblllj ,
The second principle is
that a sense of proportion-
-necessary for harmony
within the person and within
the community-demands
that court trials on lesser
matters not be weighed down
by the proofs guaranteeing
that certitude which greater
matters darnand. For justice