Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 7—November 20,19,SO
Statement Opposing Death Penalty Issued
By JIM LACKEY
WASHINGTON (NC) - A statement explaining the
U.S. Bishops’ six-year-old opposition to the death penalty
was approved Nov. 13 at the annual meeting of the
National Conference of Catholic Bishops in Washington.
The statement, which does not totally condemn the
death penalty but opposes what it sees as the unfair way it
is applied in the United States now, was approved 145-31.
But an unusually high number of bishops, 41, indicated
on their written ballots that they were abstaining on the
vote.
The statement argues that abolition of the death
penalty in the United States would promote several values
and that its current use brings about several evils.
“We should not expect simple or easy solutions (to
violent crime,)” the biships said, “and even less should we
rely on capital punishment to provide such a solution.”
Bishop Edward D. Head of Buffalo, N.Y., chairman of
the bishops’ committee which drafted the proposed
statement, stressed that the statement was not attempting
to set doctrine and was not rejecting traditional Catholic
teaching that the state has the right to take the life of a
criminal.
“We’re only saying whether capital punishment should
be imposed in the United States under present
circumstances,” he said Nov. 10 when the topic first was
discussed by the bishops.
During final debate on the proposal, Bishop Rene
Gracida of Pensacola-Tallahasse, Fla, alluded to the same
principle, contending that there is growing evidence that
the judicial system is unable to apply the death penalty
fairly.
He predicted that the Supreme Court, which now holds
that the daath penalty is constitutional as long as it is
applied with strict evenhandedness, ultimately will be
forced to rule that such evenhandedness is impossible.
The only bishop to debate against the statement was
Bishop Joseph Madera, coadjutor of Fresno, Calif., who in
an emotional speech told the bishops that his
brother-in-law was among three prison guards killed in
1971 when two men sentenced to death broke out of the
San Quentin penitentiary.
He said the incident left eight children orphaned and
drove two widows to alcoholism.
Noting arguments that compassion should be the
Christian response to violent criminals, Bishop Madera
said, “That’s fine, but what about those families.”
He added that the families prayed for the assailants,
but said the families also are still suffering from what
happened.
Bishop Joseph T. Daley of Harrisburg, Pa., then stood
and, citing Bishop Madera’s remarks and a certain amount
of “ambivalence” on the issue, said he would abstain.
The U.S. bishops opposition to the death penalty dates
from 1974, when they debated a lengthy document on
the subject but then approved only a one-sentence
statement. The lengthier document was rejected after
some bishops said it was flawed, inconsistent and
theologically inadequate.
The new statement says the abolition of capital
punishment would:
- Send a message that the “cycle of violence” can be
broken and that there are “more hopeful and effective
responses to the growth of violent crime;”
- Manifest the belief “in the unique worth and dignity
of each person, a creature made in the image and likeess
of God;”
- Strengthen the overall fight in defense of life “by
eliminating the exercise of a judicial authorization to take
human life,” and
- Respect the “deeper desires of the church as it
responds to the story of God’s redemptive and forgiving
love as manifest in the life of his Son.”
The statement also says that one reason capital
punishment is unfairly applied in the United States is that
persons with adequate finances are able to hire talented
lawyers who can avoid the death penalty while indigent
criminals cannot.
One amendment, introduced by Archbishop Philip M.
Hannan of New Orleans, would have made an exception
for “terrorists striving for the establishment of a regime
that would disregard human rights.” But the amendment
failed after Bishop Head said it was not necessary since
the statement focused strictly on capital punishment in
the United States.
Archbishop Hannan was unable to defend his
amendment because he was called back to New Orleans
before the debate took place.
During the debate, Bishop Head also noted that
Buffalo, his current residence, was one of two U.S. cities
affected by recent waves of violent crimes. There had
been some opposition to the statement on the grounds
that the recent mysterious killings of blacks in the Buffalo
and Atlanta areas should preclude opposition to the death
penalty.
MEETING
.
Pastoral Letter On Marxism
BY JIM LACKEY
WASHINGTON (NC) - A pastoral letter condemning
Marxist communism but also urging cooperation with
Marxist regimes in the quest for world peace was approved
by the U.S. bishops Nov. 12.
The vote, on the third day of the bishops’ four-day
annual general meeting in Washington, was 236-17.
When the document first was brought up for discussion
two days earlier, some bishops complained that it was too
philosophical and did not say enough about current
violations of rights by communist governments.
But some of those objections were put to rest by
several amendments, including a new preamble reminding
readers that the bishops were “not blind to the
horrendous violations of human rights perpetrated in the
name of communism or the invasions of the territorial
integrity of sovereign nations.”
Bishop Joseph A. McNicholas of Springfield, Ill., who
chaired the special committee which produced the
document, also pointed to another section of the
document which said:
“The memory of the millions of persons deported,
imprisoned, ‘liquidated’ for political reasons, the
continuing, constant violations of basic human rights, the
conquest and submission of sovereign nations, that
characterize Soviet history prove that our concerns (about
Marxism) are not unfounded.”
But for the most part, the bishops’ letter is a
philosophical examination of Marxism. It probes the areas
in which Marxism has rejected Christian thought, but also
notes that like most philosophies Marxism could “undergo
radical changes in its attitude toward religion.”
Bishop McNicholas explained to the bishops that his
committee decided to approach the subject in an
analytical rather than political context. Bishops in other
countries where communism is more of a problem than it
is in the United States, he said, would appreciate a more
philosophical statement from bishops who can look at the
problem more objectively.
The statement, which went through several drafts, was
written primarily by a Marxism scholar at Yale University,
Prof. Louis Dupre.
Several bishops continued to object to the
philosophical nature of the document, saying pastoral
letters always should be aimed at the general Catholic
public. But they said they were willing to support the
Marxism pastoral because it was “excellent” and
addressed itself to a technical subject.
Another objection, though, was raised by bishops who
said there should be similar condemnation of some of the
evils of unrestrained capitalism.
Bishop William K. Weigand of Salt Lake City, a bishop
for only two months, said his experience as a missionary
in Latin America taught him that there would be little
“neo-Marxism” in that part of the world if it were not for
the “evils and aberrations of captialism.”
He said Pope John Paul II has addressed the extremes
of both Marxism and capitalism, “and we should do the
same.”
Auxiliary Bishop Peter A. Rosazza of Hartford, Conn.,
succeeded in getting the bishops to approve by voice vote
a motion directing their committee on social development
and world peace to prepare another letter on capitalism.
The new pastoral letter states, “While the basic views
of Christianity and Marxism on the concept of the person,
the nature of the present and the expectation of the
future fundamentally disagree, they nevertheless retain a
sufficient common basis for fruitful comparison.”
It adds, “Regarding the means, howe'’ r, which the
Marxist movement has traditionally vocated for
attaining its goals, its opposition to Christian practice
appears irreconcilable.”
Noting possibilities for cooperation between Christians
and Marxists, the document says that “the church
recognizes the depth and dimension of the ideological
differences that divide the human race, but the urgent
practical need for cooperative efforts in the human
interest overrules these differences.
“Hence Catholic teaching seeks to avoid exacerbating
the ideological opposition and to focus upon two
problems requiring common efforts across the ideological
divide: keeping the peace and empowering the poor.”
OPENING SESSION -- As the meeting of the
National Conference of Catholic Bishops opens in
Washington, members pray for colleagues who
have died during the past six months. (NC Photo
by Bob Strawn)
Bishops’ Statement On Laity
WASHINGTON (NC) - The U.S. bishops Nov. 13’
approved a new statement on the laity which praises the
involvement of lay Catholics.
The statement, “The American Catholic Laity: 1980
- Reflections of the American Bishops” was passed by a
voice vote during the final meeting day for the bishops,
gathered in Washington.
As passed by the bishops, the document underscores
the role of lay men and women in their church: “Since
the Second Vatican Council there are new opportunities
for lay persons to serve in the church. We acknowledge
gratefully the continuing and increasing contributions of
volunteers and part-time workers who serve on parish and
diocesan councils, boards of education, financial, liturgical
and ecumenical committees, as well as those who exercise
roles such as special ministers of the Eucharist, catechist
and pastoral assistant,” it states.
“We are grateful too for the large numbers of lay
people who have volunteered and are serving in the
missions,” the statement adds.
According to a background statement by Bishop Albert
Ottenweller of Steubenville, chairman of the Bishops’
Committee on the Laity, “We think it (the statement) will
affirm the laity and call them to be a strong force in the
church especially challenging them to holiness and to be
about building the kingdom of God in the world.”
In his remarks to the assembled bishops, Bishop
Ottenweller noted that it is the 15th anniversary of the
Vatican II “Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity.”
“We want it to be positive,” he said of the U.S.
'bishops’ statement. “We’re talking to God’s people.”
As Bishop Ernest Unterkoefler of Charleston said,
“We’re very gratified with this statement ... for its
content and opening for dialogue with the laity.” He
expressed hopes the document would be widely
distributed and Bishop Ottenweller promised efforts to do
so.
Earning the unanimous approval of the advisory
council to the National Conference of Catholic
Bishops-U.S. Catholic Conference administrative
committee, the document covers the various activities of
the laity in the church - their calls to adulthood,
community, ministry and holiness - as well as such topics
as social justice and cooperation between clergy and laity.
Bishops Call On Catholic Colleges To Maintain Identity
BY STEPHENIE OVERMAN
WASHINGTON (NC) - The U.S. bishops approved a
pastoral letter on higher education which calls on Catholic
schools to maintain their identity in order to survive.
The bishops approved the letter on “Catholic Higher
Education and the Pastoral Mission of the Church,” Nov.
13 by a vote of 193 to 2, with one abstention.
The letter was the first specifically written on Catholic
higher education, said Auxiliary Bishop Daniel Pilarczyk
of Cincinnati, chairman of the bishops’ Education
Committee. The document is a message to those working
in higher education and to the church at large.
Noting that during the 1980s all church-related colleges
and universities will meet new challenges and new
pressures, the document stressed a continuing need for a
“clear definition by each institution of its religious
identity and mission.”
It also said the future of church-related education is
“essential to the presentation of pluralism in higher
education.”
The distinguishing mark of every Catholic college or
university is that, “in an appropriate academic fashion, it
offers its students an introduction to the Catholic
theological heritage. This is a moral obligation owed to
Catholic students,” the pastoral stated.
“The term ‘Catholic’ should never be a mere label,” the
pastoral continued.
The letter said that Pope John Paul II has repeatedly
called for the Catholic campus to be a community of
faith. “All Catholic activity must of necessity be pointed
to an objective that is ultimately religious - how to know
God better and serve him more faithfully,” the letter
stated.
“Our concern then, is that students and faculty find on
campuses the community of faith which can encourage
and support them,” the bishops’ statement said.
The bishops added a statement of recognition for the
contributions made by Catholic scholars and professors in
secular and state universities. “Collectively they represent
a vast Catholic presence,” the bishops said.
Theology should enable students to think and to act
within a vision of life that includes religious values, the
bishops’ pastoral continued.
“Without solid philosophical groundings, both teachers
and students in all fields of study cannot avoid
superficiality and fragmentation.” the document said.
Catholic colleges and universities have the obligation to
study and teach the moral and ethical dimensions, of
every discipline, according to the statement.
The bishops also expressed concern for the educational
opportunities of minorities. “Catholic institutions should
strive to respond to their legitimate needs, providing an
education which respects their culture while offering the
benefits of the Christian heritage,” the document said.
Education for justice is another significant element,
said the bishops’ letter.
“Those who enjoy the benefits of Catholic higher
education have the obligation to provide our society with
leadership in matters of justice and human rights,” the
pastoral said.
“Knowledge of economics and politics will not in itself
bring about justice, unless it is activated by human and
religious ideals. However, religious ideals without the
necessary secular expertise will not provide the kind of
leadership needed to influence our complex society.”
Noting that many Catholic colleges and universities
integrate social justice teaching with field education and
experience and that students are encouraged to become
personally aware of problems, the letter stated, “These are
responses we should expect from institutions which take
the Gospel seriously.”
Students and faculty “are encouraged to become
personally aware of problems of injustice and their
responsibility to be involved in the social process,” the
statement said.
Bishops Approve Changes To Avoid ‘Sexist’ Language
BY STEPHENIE OVERMAN
WASHINGTON (NC) - Language in the Mass which
refers exclusively to men should be changed to include
both men and women, the National Conference of
Catholic Bishops decided in balloting Npv. 12.
At their meeting in Washington the bishops approved a
series of changes in the eucharistic prayers of the Mass.
The changes, prepared by the International Commission
on English in the Liturgy (ICEL), must be approved by
the Vatican before they can be put into effect.
The United States is the first country to recommend
changes in the liturgy to avoid exclusive langauge. The
changes would include changing the words of
Consecration to read “it will be shed for you and for all”
instead of “for you and for all men.”
The so-called sexist language in the Mass has caused
pain for men as well as women, Archbishop Rembert
Weakland of Milwaukee, chairman of the bishops’
Committee on Liturgy, said.
The changes could “help to unify our worshipping
community, and that, in itself, is a worthy effort,” the
archbishop commented.
The change in the wording during the Consecration is
important, he said. “The words of institution are the high
point of the Mass and really stand out” he continued. At a
time when people should be most attentive, they are most
jarred by the exclusive language, he said.
The change in the words of “institution” was approved
211 to 35.
The bishops also voted changes in the eucharistic
prayer for Masses of Reconciliation to remove exclusive
language. —.
The bishops also approved a recommendation to revise
eucharistic prayer IV, “in view of its discriminatory
language.” ICEL had noted that a comprehensive revision
of all ICEL translations of liturgical texts is underway, but
that some limited revisions now could respond to the
“widespread concern within the church that some texts
improperly exclude or appear to exclude women.”
Of 10 proposed items the bishops approved nine by the
necessary two-thirds majority. One item involving the
English translations of additional Mass texts which appear
in the Roman Missal was dropped. One on the English
translation of a Mass text for Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha
was passed by a show of hands Nov. 13 after some
changes in the wording.
Some of the changes “touched up the theology” of the
translations, according to Archbishop Weakland. One
item, which was approved 235 to 2, recommended that
the title “Mother of God” be inserted into the Litany of
the Blessed Virgin Mary.
ICEL is preparing a retranslation of the
English-language liturgy and if the changes voted on by
the bishops are approved by Rome they will be interim
texts. ICEL’s target date for completion of revisions is
1986.
Last year a majority of bishops voted to delete male
only references from the liturgy but, because the number
was not two-thirds of the membership, the motions did
not pass.
At the 1979 meeting the bishops voted on two motions
to change “non-inclusive” langauge. One motion would
have deleted the word “men” from the Consecration and
the second would have allowed priests to make changes in
presidential prayers within the sacramentary, liturgy of
the hours and the rites to avoid referring only to men.
Members of the Women’s Ordination Conference, who
had protested last year’s failure to approve changes in
exclusive language, called this year’s vote “a source of
encouragement.”
In a statement following the Nov. 12 vote, the
Women’s Ordination Conference said it was “a much
needed step toward the acceptance of women as full,
equal, visible members of the Roman Catholic Church.”
Mercy Sister Theresa Kane, president of the Leadership
Conference of Women Religious, said the changes were
the result of a “growing awareness on the part of the
bishops.”
Sister Kane said that bishops were beginning to be
aware of sexist language in documents as well, which she
said she sees as a good sign.
At a press conference after the vote Archbishop
Weakland was asked if his committee had plans to review
other areas of the liturgy for male only imagery and
language, including references to God.
“As yet my committee has not,” Archbishop Weakland
said, but added that ICEL and the Catholic Biblical
Association have begun to examine translations.
The bishop also noted that English-speaking countries
such as England, South Africa and Australia and some
European countries are examining the question of
exclusive language in Liturgy.
According to Archbishop Weakland, the problem of
exclusive language is now being more widely recognized
and he said even children in his archdiocese have asked
him why women are not mentioned in parts of the Mass.