Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 4 — The Georgia Bulletin, January 4,1973
Most Rev. Thomas A. Donnellan - Publisher
Rev. James J. Maciejewski - Editor
Michael Motes — Editorial Assistant
Marie Mulvenna - Editorial Assistant
Business Office
756 West Peachtree. N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
Member of the Catholic Press Association
and Subscriber to N.C.W.C. News Service
Telephone 875-5536
Postmaster: Send POD Form 3579 to THE GEORGIA BULLETIN
U.S.A. $5.00
Canada $5.00
Foreign $6.50
202 East Sixth Street, Waynesboro, Georgia 30830
Send all editorial correspondence to: THE GEORGIA BULLETIN
756 West Peachtree Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
Second Class Postage Paid at Waynesboro, Ga. 30830
Published weekly except the second and last weeks
in June, July and August and the last week in December
at 202 E. Sixth St., Waynesboro, Ga. 30830
The opinions contained in these editorial columns
the free expressions of free editors in a free Catholic press.
Give Peace A Chance
(A GUEST EDITORIAL)
A few weeks ago, as the Feast of
Christmas was approaching, many of us
really believed that the Peace of Christ
was truly going to reign on earth as
people all over the world celebrated the
anniversary of the Savior’s birth.
But peace did not come. Instead,
while we sang “Glory to God in the
highest and peace to His people on
earth” bombs began to rain anew
throughout Southeast Asia.
Gilbert Keith Chesterton once denied
that Christianity had been tried and
found wanting, claiming that it had not
really been tried at all. The same might
be said about peace, especially in
Vietnam where war has been a way of
life for thirty years.
Nothing good has come from all that
fighting. Thousands of innocent people
have died. Untold more thousands have
been scarred and maimed for life. The
country, both North and South, has
been devestated. And, though Vietnam is
more than 9,000 miles from the United
States, the war there is inflicting terrible
wounds on this nation.
War has failed - miserably - to secure
justice and human rights, and it has had
thirty years to try to do it.
What is so wrong about giving peace a
chance?
This nation was founded by people
who were hounded from their
homelands because of their religious
beliefs. Has the religious Faith of the
American people become so weak that
they no longer believe that God can
work His will through men - any kind of
men, even evil men? Do the American
people really believe that peace is solely
the work of men and not the work of
God?
Are we so afraid of the Godless men
with whom we must deal in order to
bring about peace that the American
motto “In God We Trust” no longer has
any meaning?
As we begin this new year, we urge
President Nixon, the Congress and the
American people to “Trust in the Lord,
for He is good,” to stop the war -- now -
and give peace a chance.
— Father Frank Donahue
Editor, the SOUTHERN CROSS
“Mom, don’cha wish we could put away the war instead of the Christmas
albums this year?”
Happy New Year
To all our readers, we express our very
best wishes and most fervent prayers for
a happy new year, full of God’s best gifts
and graces. It is our firm belief that His
will is that 1973 be a better year for all
men than 1972 was, and that the only
thing which can prevent translating the
divine will into reality is the apathy and
coldness of human hearts.
An old song says, “Open up your
heart and let the sunshine in.”,We say,
“Open up your heart and let Faith and
Hope in the Lord’s almighty power
enkindle there the fire of His Love so
that all the earth may be warmed and
comforted by It.”
OUR
PARISH
0^°
\ n
gG>u/\ fry
Lady &u
week*
HtNME Hamm
*J°y C £ Cur?
Well, I didn’t mean this
much equality!”
•V.y.V.V.Y.
£Y A Problem
Of Liberal Romaniticism
Reverend Andrew M. Greeley
An interesting recent example of
romanticism is a comment of Dr. Everett C.
Parker of the Office of Communications of the
United Church of Christ. Dr. Parker’s agency
has conducted a study of the racial and sexual
distribution of jobs in commercial television
stations and found, not unsurprisingly, that
blacks and women are underrepresented. If he
had been content with reporting that finding
and suggesting that the stations ought to ask
themselves whether they might be practicing
discrimination, perhaps without realizing it, all
would have been well. But Dr. Parker (as
quoted in the November 22 issue of THE NEW
YORK TIMES) had more to say: “We cannot
rely on white males to interpret and
communciate the life styles and experiences of
blacks, chicanos, orientals, Indians, and
women.”
One wonders why not? There are certainly
male writers who could much more adequately
describe the experiences of women than could
Gloria Steinem. There certainly are white
writers who could do a better job at describing
what most blacks are like than Jesse Jackson
could; and there are certainly Jewish writers
who understand Gentiles better than many
Gentile writers. Are women so different from
men that no man can write about them? Are
blacks so different from whites that a white
man cannot preside over a TV station that tries
to cover black experiences adequately? Are
orientals so different from the rest of us that no
one but another oriental can understand them?
There was a time when Dr. Parker’s assertion
would have been written off as pure racism. In
my judgment, that is what it still is. For it
denies the common humanity of us all and
assumes that differences of sex, race, and
ethnicity are so great that mutual
understanding is not possible.
I have no doubt that there is some
discrimination against women, blacks, orientals,
Indians, and chicanos in the TV industry. I also
have no doubt that there is discrimination
against Poles and Italians. But I do not think
discrimination is proved by mathematics.
Training, taste, inclination, aspirations - all of
these must be taken into account. Despite Dr.
Pottinger and the zealots from HEW,
underrepresentation of certain groups is not a
proof of discrimination. It is a bit of evidence,
and one that must be taken seriously, but it is
not enough to close the case - not in a world
where careful analysis prevails over powerful
feelings of righteousness. If only those
institutions which have exact representations of
all minority (everyone is a minority, after all)
and sex groups (both of them) are to be
assumed free of discrimination, then we have a
quota system imposed on us before the
discussion has even begun.
And quotas would not necessarily guarantee
Dr. Parker’s interpretation of the life styles of
minorities. A black face does not guarantee
understanding of the black experience, nor a
female body the understanding of woman’s
experience. One would have thought that these
observations were self-evident, but in
liberalism’s present romantic interlude, they are
not.
Dr. Parker wants to see more opportunities
for women and blacks in the mass media (and
perhaps for Poles and Italians, too, though
that’s uncertain because he doesn’t say). But
such an admirable goal is not going to be
achieved by using quotas as a means of proving
discrimination, and it is certainly not going to
be achieved by insisting that certain
fundamental kinds of human experience are
totally beyond the understanding of those who
do not have certain racial or sexual
characteristics. What is required to interpret the
human condition is talent. And sex or race
neither guarantees the possession of it nor its
limitations.
Questions
And Answers
Monsignor John F. McDonough
QUESTION: What are the causes of the lack of spiritual fervor in the world today?
ANSWER: There are many causes which have brought about the present malaise of
tepidity in the spiritual life of Christian people taken as a whole, e.g., the displacement of
God by material affluence, the rejection of the Church as the primary arbiter of faith and
morals, man’s concept of total self-sufficiency. However, most spiritual writers say the
cause of the lack of piety or spiritual fervor in individuals is the habitual acceptance of
deliberate venial sin.
One who is not concerned with venial sin is necessarily placing himself on a rather
mediocre moral and spiritual level. He has chosen tepidity. The faithful who truly live
their supernatural vocation can be weak and can sometimes even sin gravely; but if they
fight and get up again, they will never be settled in tepidity. The tepid, on the other hand,
consciously choose a calculated mediocrity: no serious sin, because the consequences are
rather bothersome, all the same; no fervor, because fervor requires an effort which is
equally upsetting. They choose “golden mediocrity”.
One should recall the Apocalypse and Our Lord’s condemnation of certain Christian
communities in Asia. “I hold this against you,” it is said to the Church of Ephesus, “that
you have fallen from your first love. Remember then from whence you have fallen, and
do penance and return to your former manner of life.” (Rev. 2: 2-5). Even more familiar
are the reproaches addressed to the Church of Laodicea: “I know your works. You are
neither cold nor hot. Would to heaven that you were cold or hot! But you are
lukewarm . . .and for this reason I will vomit you out of my mouth . . .Recover your zeal
and repent. Behold I stand at the door and knock!” (Rev. 3: 15-20).
What are the remedies for tepidity? Quite a number could be mentioned. Any spiritual
exercise can, in the final analysis, aid us in shaking off this state.
Let us mention at the very first a little extraordinary physicial mortification. It is not
necessary to do a lot or even very severe mortifications. But something physical and out
of the ordinary. This wakes us up from the torpor. Perhaps it is because of the
psychological effects which results. It shakes us up a little. We should have recourse to
some penance to shake us from our torpor; experience proves the efficacy of this practice
and that is sufficient.
In addition, a good day of recollection will likewise help us to bounce back. By this we
mean a day of true reflection, taken voluntarily in order to consider the situation quite
frankly and with the intention of taking some good resolutions. A great many days of
recollection lose their values from the fact that they lack a sincerity in the desire to
change one’s life. Unless we have the desire to progress these days are a waste of time. A
little truthful and serious analysis taken with determination is very favorable.
Finally, God sometimes comes to our aid through some unforeseen event. A good
shakeup is sometimes necessary: an illness for example in which the soul is suddenly
confronted with eternity, or it could be the loss of someone who is near and dear to us,
the trials of misfortune, a public humiliation. In general, anything which affects a salutary
detachment and causes us to realize the nothingness of creatures and of worldly goods
and pleasures is of great spiritual benefit. Often these events, no matter how painful they
are, constitute a special grace granted by God oui oi rlis providence and merciful love. If
it is understood and accepted as such by the one who receives it, it can be the beginning
ui a new life and of a basic transformation.
Abortion
Is a Sword
Joseph A. Breig
The CBS television program “Maude,” the
other week, was a graphic illustration of the
fact that Catholic communications media, far
from being any sort of luxury, are an absolute
necessity if the mission of the Church, given to
it by Jesus Christ, is to be carried out.
There is no need to describe the “Maude”
episode in detail. It was the second of two
centering on Maude’s having become pregnant
at a late age for that sort of thing; and it closed
with the audience applauding a decision by
Maude and her husband deciding that she
should have an abortion.
Earlier, she had said she was going to have
the baby because she thought that was what her
husband would want. “Have the baby” were
words she repeatedly used. But in the end,
there was no mention whatever, explicit or
implicit, of the baby’s right to life - the right
not to be wantonly put to death. The infant,
indeed, did not enter into the final discussion at
all. The child not only did not count; the child
was simply not in the picture.
Christ, in one of his most meaningful
utterances during his life on earth, said that he
had come not to bring peace but a sword - a
sword that would divide even father from son,
and mother from daughter, and brother and
sister from brother and sister.
The sword of which Jesus spoke is the Word
of God - the sword of truth and justice and
morality. It is the sword of the truth about
human beings and their responibilities before
God, and of their eternal destiny. It is a sword
which must be wielded tirelessly and
uncompromisingly by Catholics and above all
by the Catholic press and other Catholic media.
Time after time after time, the sword of
God’s Word cuts between the Church and what
is called “the world”. It cuts between the
Catholic media and the secular media. And as I
say, the most graphic recent illustration of this
fact is the matter of the ruthless murdering of
unborn children which is going on today.
The secular media, by and large, not only try
to justify abortion with slobbering
sentimentalisms about “the right of a woman
over her own body” - as if this excused her
slaying of her own infant - but they seldom or
never state the case against abortion; they do
not in any way recognize the unborn baby’s
right to life. They simply leave the infant out of
the equation. Were there no Catholic
communications media, the unborn little ones
today would be virtually undefended.
The sword of God’s Word cuts also into
ecumenism. Today’s issue of the unborn
infant’s right to life is separating the Catholic
Church from many Protestants, but also is
separating many Protestants, who detest and
condemn abortion, from fellow Protestants.
As Jesus said, he came not to bring any sort
of phony peace of the sort that restored Pilate
and Herod to friendship in their mutual guilt
for the blood of the innocent Christ - whom
Herod has tried to slay in infancy. The only
peace worthy of the follower of Christ is the
peace of truth and justice and God’s
Commandments.
Determine
Your
Own Life
Reverend Joseph Dean
Our seniors in high school are just turning
eighteen. New opportunities and responsibilities
are theirs. They want to be free in choosing
their own careers, their own vocation, their
own life style. They resent older people telling
them every move to make, lecturing them at
every turn.
This desire for freedom in determining one’s
own life is deep in the human heart. It is a
desire that is amazingly respected by our loving
Father Himself. We wonder sometimes why
God does not speak more directly to us, give us
clearer commands, determine more exactly how
we should live. We wonder why God didn’t
make a perfect world.” Such a world, though,
would be a huge machine, controlled,
dominated, determined without freedom,
without choice, without personal decision or
self affirmation.
Is not the present world a much greater gift
from God in which He shares with us its gradual
development and final outcome? A senior in
high school can see this more clearly than an
older person, for he is so keen on making his
own way, in fulfilling himself, in being free to
exercise his own responsibility.
By having the freedom to live his own life, a
person more quickly comes to the awareness of
his own limitations. Then he is more quick to
seek help in a spirit of trust and confidence
from the very one who allowed him to be free,
who trusted him in the first place.
The experience of prayer in such a young
person now becomes spontaneous, meaningful
and really productive. He acknowledges God’s
providence, he is grateful for God’s gifts, he is
repentant for his own mistakes, and he is ready
to seek out God’s will for him in the good news
of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father who
comes into our lives as the Way, the Light and