Newspaper Page Text
Page 2 • Faith Today
Faith Today • Page 3
When people disagree
By Joe Michael Feist
NC News Service
When it was published in May
1983. “The Challenge of Peace:
God’s Promise and Our
Response’’ generated intense
debate in church and in society.
The U.S. bishops’ pastoral letter
on war and peace in the nuclear
age was studied and discussed,
praised and criticized.
It is interesting to note that the
bishops invited dialogue on their
letter. They called the letter “a
first step toward a message of
peace and hope.’’
In their letter, the bishops
pointed to some universal moral
principles. Then they applied
those principles to specific situa
tions, acknowledging that not all
people of good will would reach
the same specific conclusions
they had reached.
For example, all would agree
that war is evil and that a con
scious effort must be made to
work for peace. Those are
general principles. There is room
for discussion, however, on ways
to avoid war.
Father J. Bryan Hehir offered
this example: “There is room, as
the bishops acknowledged, for a
vigorous debate about .the ‘no-
firs't-use’ (of nuclear weapons)
proposal of the pastoral; there is
no alternative to the prohibition
against the direct killing of
civilians in a strategy of
deterrence.”
Father Hehir gave the com
mencement address this year at
The Catholic University of
America in Washington, D.C. He
is secretary of the U.S. Catholic
Conference Department of Social
Development and World Peace
What has emerged in the war
and peace pastoral, and what
continues to be discussed today,
is the question of pluralism in the
church — a variety of views on
specific social issues.
“On some complex social
questions, the church expects a
certain diversity of views even
though all hold the same univer
sal moral principles,” the U.S.
bishops said in their pastoral.
“There is a framework of
moral principles which constitute
the Catholic social vision; within
this framework pluralism can,
should and will persist,” said
Father Hehir. In the Catholic
tradition, he continued, such
“pluralism is not anarchy; it has
content, limits and rules of
discourse which produce a struc
tured pluralism. The meaning of
structured pluralism is being
worked out in theory and prac
tice in the postconciliar church.”
Father Hehir turned to several
areas of social concern for ex
amples of what he meant.
—Labor and management:
There can be differing views on
the roles of labor and manage
ment. But, said Father Hehir,
there can be no disagreement on
the basic right of employees to
form unions.
—Government’s role; The size
and style of the state’s role in
society can be debated. But “the
principle that the state has a
positive, active role to play,
especially in defense of the poor,
is beyond question in Catholic
teaching,” the priest stated.
Does this mean that the
statements and pastoral letters of
the bishops can be casually
dismissed when they touch on
specific points of public concern?
In their peace pastoral, the U.S.
bishops responded this way:
“The moral judgments that we
make in specific cases, while not
binding in conscience, are to be
given serious attention and con
sideration by Catholics as they
determine whether their moral
judgments are consistent with the
Gospel.”
There is little doubt that in the
future the world’s bishops will
continue to issue statements on
matters of public policy. Discus
sion and debate will continue to
be heard.
Jesuit Father Joseph O’Hare,
president of Fordham University
in New York, has urged that a
“Catholic style” mark this
debate. That style, he said,
should entail civility and a will
ingness to listen to opposing
viewpoints.
(Feist is associate editor of
Faith Today.)
Transformation, yes. Annihilation, no.
By Father John Castelot
NC News Service
Over and over again in the
beginning of Genesis we hear the
refrain: “God saw how good it
was.” At the end of the sixth day
of creation, “God looked on
everything he had made and he
found it very good.”
What is the message in this?
Clearly it was the basic truth that
the universe is good, indeed
precious. The universe is God’s
handiwork. It is a gift to treasure
and cherish.
In the modern age of space ex
ploration, when we confront the
overwhelming magnitude of the
solar system, we react instinctive
ly as the psalmist did. “When I
behold your heavens, the work
of your fingers, the moon and
the stars which you set in place
— What is man that you should
be mindful of him, or the son of
man that you should care for
him?” *
He continues: “You have made
him little less than the angels,
and crowned him with glory and
honor. You have given him rule
over the works of your hands,
putting all things under his feet "
(Psalm 8:4-8). i
God entrusted this colossal yet
delicate and finely tuned system
to our care. He expects us not to
exploit it with callous insensitivi
ty, certainly not to vandalize and
brutalize it. Instead, we are to
use the universe constructively, •
to cherish and love it.
All of creation has been given
to us as a sacred trust, for God
has great plans for it. He has not
revealed in detail just how he in
tends to bring those plans to
fulfillment, but one thing seems •
certain. God plans to bring the
universe to a glorious fulfillment
involving a stunning transforma
tion — not annihilation, not in
cineration, but transformation.
When the prophets envisioned
God’s final triumph over evil,
they did so in terms of just such
a transformation of the universe.
“Lo, I am about to create new
heavens and a new earth. The
things of the past shall not be
remembered or come to mind”
(Isaiah 65:17).
Continuing in this tradition, the
New Testament author of Revela
tion gave this imaginative picture
of the eternal city of God. “Then
■vl saw new heavens and a new
earth. The former heavens and
the former earth had passed away
and the sea was no longer. I also
saw a new Jerusalem, the holy ci
ty, coming down out of heaven
from God, beautiful as a bride
-prepared to meet her husband”
(21:1-2).
If the author wrote of the pass
ing of the former universe, it was
in terms of a transformation. This
transformation meant the elimina
tion of all evil.
It is toward a glorious destiny
that we, under God, are to guide
our universe. St. Paul expressed
the idea in this memorable
passage: “I consider the suffer
ings of the present to be as
nothing compared with the glory
to be revealed in us. Indeed, the
whole created world eagerly
awaits the revelation of the sons
of God” (Romans 8:18-20).
In a very real sense, the
glorification of Jesus’ body in the
resurrection is not only the
model of our ultimate glorifica
tion but the pattern of the final
transformation of the whole
universe.
(Father Castelot teaches at St.
John's Seminary, Plymouth, Mich.)
Random reflections on the pastoral
By Ivan Kauffman
NC News Service
Have your feelings about
nuclear weapons changed during
the past year because of the U.S.
bishops’ pastoral letter on war
and peace?
That’s the question I asked
members of my parish recently,
approximately one year after the
bishops issued their letter ex
amining many questions of a
nuclear age and encouraging the
people of the church to work for
peace. Here are some answers I
heard.
“It’s raised consciousness on
the issue,” said a businessman
who served in combat in World
War II. “There is a supreme
moral issue here, whether these
weapons can ever be used
because of the tremendous
destructive power they have.”
“It’s all pretty scary,” said one
woman. “I’ve thought about it
more because of the bishops’ let
ter,” she said, “but in a way I
feel more helpless. I used to
picket and march during the
1960s, but I don’t know if it
does any good.”
“My main concern is with
human error,” the parish
secretary said. “There’s too much
chance of human breakdown. I’m
from a military family — we’re »
the ones who get killed if there’s
a war.”
Her husband is a real-estate in
vestor who once worked at the
Pentagon. “I’m really stymied,”
he said. “We’re spending enor
mous amounts of money we *
could spend somewhere else.”
But he indicated, “I’m afraid it’s
a necessary evil.” He added that
he doesn’t think the Russians can *
be trusted.
“It was what I was feeling but
couldn’t put into words,” a
psychiatric nurse and mother said
of the bishops’ pastoral letter.
“The symbolism of it was what
mattered to me, that the church ’*
was willing to get involved. It
made me very proud.”
“I don’t think men should ever,
have come to this place where
they can just push a button and <b
blow up everything,” said an
older woman with emotion.
A young mother active in the
peace movement said she ap
preciated the process the bishops
*went through. “I felt less alone,
that there were leaders in the
church who felt as I did. It gave
^me hope.”
A priest said he had been
strongly affected by the
testimony of medical experts on
"the effects of nuclear weapons.
“Anything that destroys like
that,” he said, “has got to have
.some responsibility attached to it.
That’s a moral issue.”
“I don’t think my kids have
paid much attention to it,” said
"one father. But when I spoke
with his daughter, the president
of our teen club, she told me the
•.pastoral is being discussed in her
high school religion classes. “It’s
a big thing there.”
The person who supported the
“bishops’ pastoral most strongly
was a former Vietnam military of
ficer. “When you create weapons
.with that much devastation,
you're talking about a lot of
death.
“I visited Hiroshima in 1951,”
lie continued. “That one bomb
wiped out family after family
after family. I thought then, what
a waste — wasting human
beings.”
He added: “I’ve seen death —
and I’m not sure we need to con
tinue to learn how to kill
people.”
What struck me as I spoke
with these people was how deep
ly concerned they are. And I was
struck by their mostly positive
feelings toward the pastoral. I
had deliberately sought to inter
view a cross section of
parishioners, including several
people who a year ago had op
posed the bishops getting involv
ed in this pastoral.
Above all I was struck by a
sense of frustration. People know
something has to be done for
peace, but they don’t know what
to do. That bothers them.
But as the bishops point out in
the pastoral, faith gives hope and
hope gives the “capacity to live
with danger without being over
whelmed by it.”
(Kauffman is a free-lance
writer in Washington, D.C.)
FOOD...
The threat of an industrial plant
closing hung over a Midwestern
city two years ago. At that time,
a couple visiting from another ci
ty were struck by a homily they
heard during Mass.
The priest spoke of the plant, a
major source of jobs in the com
munity. He pointed to the effects
the plant’s closing could have on
individuals who worked in the
plant, on families, on the total
community.
The homilist focused the atten
tion of the entire congregation
on the lives of the people of that
city — their need for hope, their
current anxiety.
The Christian community is
directly concerned about these
people who need hope, the
priest suggested. The Christian
community in that city was con
cerned that people’s value and
dignity not be lost from view as
a large corporation worked
toward a decision that would af
fect so many jobholders.
The homily that Sunday was
just one more reminder of the
scope of Christian concerns —
concerns which stretch outward
into the lives of people: to the
rights of the unborn; to the
jobless, the hungry; to those who
suffer discrimination; to those
fearful of what a modern war
fought with the most powerful
modern weapons could mean.
..for discussion
1. Why do you think the war
and peace debate has captured
the attention of so many people
in the past few years?
2. What does the word
“peace” mean to you?
3. What practical steps can you
take to become a peacemaker —
for example, at home or in socie
ty at large?
4. Father James Bacik, inter
viewed by Katharine Bird, thinks
some people may avoid thinking
about the issue of nuclear war
because it is so painful. Do you
agree? Is it a painful issue?
5. The issues of war and peace,
abortion, racism and hunger have
been called moral issues by
church leaders. What makes these
issues moral issues?
...for thought
Recognition of the value of
human life is what underlies
these concerns of the church.
In their 1983 pastoral letter on
war and peace, the U.S. bishops
put it this way: “At the center of
the church’s teaching on peace
and at the center of all Catholic
social teaching, are the
transcendence of God and the
dignity of the human person. The
human person is the clearest
reflection of God’s presence in
the world; all of the church’s
work in pursuit of both justice
and peace is designed to protect
and promote the dignity of every
person.”
For the bishops, decisions
about nuclear weapons rank
among the most pressing moral
questions. “While these decisions
have obvious military and
political aspects, they involve
fundamental moral choices,” the
bishops stated.
But it is not a matter of exten
ding the scope of church con
cerns into purely political areas
for purely political reasons. The
content and context of Christian
peacemaking is not set by a
political agenda or by an
ideological program, said the
bishops.
Christians, they added, are
“called to be peacemakers, not
by some movement of the mo
ment, but by our Lord Jesus.”
SECOND HELPINGS
“Talking to Children About
Nuclear War” is a new book by
William Van Ornum and Mary
Wicker Van Ornum. The authors
present the book “for adults
and young people who want to
talk with each other about
nuclear war but don’t know
how.” The threat of nuclear war
evokes strong feelings in peo
ple — including “fear, anger,
cynicism, bewilderment, denial,
despair.” Often, the book in
dicates, adults are surprised to
learn that their children already
are very aware of living in a
nuclear age. The book helps
adults overcome their reluc
tance to discuss modem war
fare with children. “We believe
that talking to children about
nuclear war is a responsibility
that should not be left to
‘others,’” say the authors. (Con
tinuum Publishing Co., 370 Lex
ington Ave., New York, N.Y.
10017. Hardback, $12.95;
Paperback, $7.95.)