Newspaper Page Text
14—THE CATHOLIC TIMES
Friday, April 13. 1956 THE CATHOLIC TIMES Published Every Week by The Catholic Times, Inc. Columbus. Ohio NOTICE: Send All Changes ol Address to P. 0. Box 636 Columbus. Ohio Executive and Editorial Offices: 246 E. Town Street. Columbus 15. Ohio Address all communications for publication to P. O. Box 636 Columbus 16. Ohio Telephones: CA. 4-5195 CA 4-5196 Price of The Cetholie Time* i» 13 P” year. AU I'jbecriptionii whotild he presented to our otfieo throtrrh the pastor* of the parish**. Remittance* thonld he made payable to the Cath •lie Times. Anonymous communications will he disregarded. We do not hold ourselves responsible for any siews opinions expressed in th* eom monies twin* of onr orre»pondent*. Entered as Seeond Class Matter at Post Offie*. ttohimbus Ohio. St. Franeis de Sale*. Patron of the Catholi* Prees, Pray for us 1 _____ This Paper Printed by Union Labor Shepherd and Hock Siner the liturgy is now commemorating (hr time hrist spent among His disciples, after the Resurrection, it is natural that He should ha presented, a- Sunday's Gospel presents Him, under the figuie of the Good Shepherd. is a title He applied to Himself—“I am the Good Shepherd, and 1 know Mine and Mine know Me.” It is a title that would have special mean ing for the people to whom He spoke, for His life nn earth was spent ii. a pastoral country, where the flocks of sheep grazing quietly on the hills, under the watchful care of their shepherds, were in constant view, a picture of peace and »curity. It is a figure, inherited from the Old Testa ment, that has heen part of ‘Christian thinking from the beginning: it inspired frescoes and carvings in the catacombs and has been continued in the. development of all branches of Christian art through the centuries. And it has a deeper appeal than ever to our modern mechanized civ ilization, for we sorely miss the tranquilly, the simplicity, the wholesomer.ess that it suggests. Tn worried, bewildered people everywhere, the thought of the Good Shepherd, concerned for their welfare, exercising His divine wisdom and power in their behalf, must bring consolation for the refuffs of daily life, and courage to meet the trials that press in so relentlessly. Christ warns His flock, too, against the false shepherd—the “hireling, who is not a •hepherd, whose own the sheep are not.'’ The hireling pretends to guide and help the sheep, hut when he sees the wolf coming he “leaves the gheep and flees. And the wolf snatches and scat ters the sheep.” How many of these false shep herd are among us today, boastful, pretentious, claiming to ho able to show the way to hap piness! There is the atheist, who urges men to forget their obligations to God and to rely upon “their own” resources and the materialist, who says that worldly possessions are all that man needs and the secular scientist, who insists that knowl edge of the workings of nature will make man upremely content and the Communist, who of fers a detailed plan that combines the worst features of atheism and materialism and tcl|s man that he must make himself a slave of the etale, there arc other advocates of selfishness and indulgence, of indecency and immorality. All nf these arc hirelings, seeking for their own profit Io mislead men and bringing only sorrow and disillusionment upon themselves and those who are so foolish as to believe them. The wolf of disorder and hatred is waiting to pounce upon the flock which puls itself in charge of these false shephards, and the sad effects ran be seen all over the world today. With what confidence and thankfulness should we, then, stay close to the Good Shepherd, Who leads and guards us. and Who has laid down His life for us! Shall wo not listen intently for the sound of His voice, as He calls us from places of danger and into the course Ho selects for us? And can we not help hring to Him those who now dn not know Him as He pleads for us to do? They, too, belong to Him, and He wants them to hear His voice so “there ahall be one fold and one Shepherd.” Toward that unity we should strive, for it is the unity of peace in Christ.. An Apology Io the Parson The term “Malthusian,” though not so com mon now, still moans one who advocates the prac tice of birth control. Moralists have heen wont to call Neo Malthusians such people as Margaret Sanger, Doctors Abraham and Hannah Stone among contemporaries, Annie Besant and Charles Bradlaugh in the nineties of the last century. We are, of course, not speaking of natural family linpitation, but of the use of artificial means of prexcntion. The first calls lor self control. The aefond, as Chesterson wittily observed, means no births and no control. Perhaps it was the awarc neiss of this further moral weakness in their posi lufn that led all these people Io substitute for “birth control” the handsome term “planned par enthood which sounds so appealing, hut lays the emphasis on the adjective. Wr are wandering a hit off the point. We set C"1 tn say that the wind Malthusian is derived from Malthus Thomas Robert Malthus was the •V*hnr nt the famous Essay on the Principle of Population, which gave Darwin the key idea for his theory of evolution, caused Carlyle after read ing it to label economics “the dismal science.” god hung an infamous tag around the neck of its Clerical writer. We hasten to add that gloomy Pgfrson Malthus was done an injustice. He was indeed gloomy but he was morally good. The Essay purported to show that nature’s was for population to outstrip all means of lubsistence Malthus thought he had discovered an iron law The population increased in geo metric proportions (1. 2, 4. 8. 16) whereas food Stores could he increased only arithmetically (I, 2. 3, 4. 5). The result? Famine seemed to hang ©ver the world as a constant threat. Indeed the argument will be familiar to us who have read the pseudoscientific works of Vogt and others, sheltered by the birth control wing of the UN. i Perhaps we should ad I immediately that the theory has been largely discounted today by stu dents who aie willing to turn their attention to expanding the means of food production rather than to negative ways of stopping natural pop ©Litton inreases Me .should have all starved to death (or nur grandparents would have starved and we would not even be) were Malthus right fohei figures show that, though Malthus knew it Hot, the world nf his riav consisted of some 900, 000.000 people, rose by halt centuries to about 1 500,000,000 in 1850, Io 1,550,000.000 in 1900 tn perhaps 2.400.000,000 in 1949. On the other hand, though real difficulties face us in produc ing food, consumption levels, calorie contents, dietary variations, and the world level of health have significantly increased It lies within the realm of positive thinking scientists to increase all these factors further 'Again we tend tn w andei nff the main point! The point still is that Parson Malthus u the un witting victim of those who have assumed his once influential name. hile perverting his moral teaching. The fact still is that Malthus was no "Malthusian!” The poor worried Parson who meant no harm tn anyone did indeed write seme black pages in his famous Essay, which may have merited for economics in that day the name of dismal science. Panicked by the fancied prospect of limitless human ihcrease he did seel solace in a grim ac ceptance of plagues and famines, for they did away with people. He went so far as to denounce early marriage, even charitable forms of relief, for they tended to produce or maintain people— and all his trouble was with people. He was hag ridden by a wrong impression and so we have rejected his homemade monstrosities. Rut be did not believe in birth control at all. in Margaret Sanger’s sense of the term. His eco nomics may have heen wildly improbable, how ever convincing to him and to some others hut his moral standards were no innovation, they were traditionally sound. He advocated self-control alone. Just Among Ourselves CT Passing Comment Considered or Inconsiderate The other day we came upon an advertise, menl which described the article on sale as “a many splendid thing.” Ah. shades of Francis Thompson! Misquotation becomes doubly and trebly infamous when if involves not only mis understanding but complete lack of intelligence. The newspaper which carried the witless thing in 12-point type had some admiring editorial comment on modern schools and present-day culture and enlightenment. Absurdity can go no further. And one of our pert reviews recently broke out anew with an expression which belongs to the measles, mumps, and whooping cough of cliche dom: it. described some athlete or actor (we are glad to have forgotten which) as an athlete’s athlete or an actor’s actor. It is now five years at least since this type of phrase began to fad© out under the Sock Treatment of reputable edit ors and speakers. Yet here it is again persistent polio has a rival. It is a disease's disease! There's no accounting for the genesis, de velopment, and disappearance of phrases. But one might expect, in general, some enrichment of the language by reason of their passing through the mazes of living speech. Yet their effect seems to be a weaning of the mind from justified and classic forms of expression with out supplying solid substnite for the pabulum they proscribe. Many a man, college trained and long past the inanities of what is horribly called the teen age. is practically inarticulate, save for angular cliches and semi slang expressions. He can talk breezily, but he doesn’t speak in sentences. His language is wholly outside the domain of textbooks, to analyze or to interpret. A man ol importance in the business world, a man with money and therefore a model for aspiring youth, was- known as an entertaining and inspiring speaker. He filled many an engage ment on the Streaked Coffee Cup circuit. Hardly a luncheon duh or Ki Roto group but had heard his words with pleasure and possible profit. He was always pleasant, personable never horing or tiresome not over-long in his slay at the microphone. Ho was fully entitled to the name of popular after-dinner speaker. Now this experienced and acceptable man re cently had one of his speeches recorded on tape —unknown to himself. Afterwards a steno grapher typed a copy of the address, and this was sent to him. The man was appalled. For, by his own declaration, there was not, in the entire twenty-minute speech, a single complete sent ence! It was a mass of catch phrases, elliptical remarks, cleverly constructed side-references, interlarded comparisons and illustrations, state ments half-completed and left hanging in air. There was not a sentence in the lot not one sequence of words that the ablest grammarian in the wqrld could line up under the heads of sub ject, predicate, and modifiers, and finish off with a period. It is true, of course, that the most perfectly constructed speech, conforming skillfully with all the laws of grammar and rhetoric,—can be a deadly wearying thing to listen to. Grammar, rhetoric, and logic, combined with an important subject of discussion, cannot of themselves make an interesting or valuable address. It is the man who talks, his manner, his appearance, his own interest in what he is saying, the quality of his voice and other personal facts about him.— those things are what gives life and effective ness to the speech or leaves it prosy and inert. To the speaker who has all pleasing qualification* for his work, grammar and rhetoric ought to be a great aid, but he can do without them. His presence and personality can give life to the dry bones of his discussion, even if the bones of grammar and rhetoric are absent He can make an effective speech without any sentences at all. This is one of the near miracles of human communication Yet It is a pity that the effective speaker should lack his proper equipment. We may wonder at the work nf an artist who pro duces good results without the ordinary tools of his craft Rut we should not discount the value of those tools, nor cease to regret the fact that our artist was denied them. If he does so well without them, what very superior things he might do hy possessing and using them. Besides, not all speakers are artists. Not ev ery man can charm the Brotherhood Boys at their weekly luncheon hy masterful mutilation of sentences. A speaker poor in personal at tractivcs. and poor in words and in knowing how to turn a phrase, is a heavy trial upon an audi lory. Hr is a heavier trial than the speaker who reads or recites his opus with perfect correct ness and with about as much living inspiration as that of a clicking telegraph key. To know one's language adequately and to have smooth facility in using it is a great and desirable art. Surely our Bachelors of Arts ought to possess it. But they do not. generally speaking. They talk, in public as in private, in slang phrases, quips, half sentences, cliches. They say, "O.K.” “Roger,” “See you later, alligator.” “Thais a good cigar them." ’1110 last phrase is a quote from S. l^acock. A generation or so back, pupils were urged hy prissy teachers of English Io study Pater. Newman, and Stevenson (R. L.) as the great mas ters of style. We cannot, and do not, expect modern writers and speakers to imitate the manner of these notable stylists, for the tempo of our expression has changed. Yet we can have good style in the modern manner but for that we must have words and skill in using them. Maybe, despite the changes of fashinn in speech, we might take profit still from Dr. Johnsons prescription for style and “give our dajs and nights to the study of Addison." IS Lu U/ 0. o WASHINGTON LETTER WASHINGTON—Once again, world events have developed in such a fashion as to emphasize the timeliness and wisdom of a discourse by His Holiness Pope Pius XII. In his Easter Sunday mes sage. the Holy Father prayed for the rulers of nations, that the “race toward abyss” of atomic catastrophe might be checked. His Holiness said the “alarm and terror has heen in creased recently hy the devel opment of radio-guided miss iles. The very next day, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission an nounced here that Soviet Rus sia had conducted the sixth nuclear weapons test in the last eight months. It was not stated whether it was an atom ic or hydrogen explosion that had been detected. Also on the day after the Holy Father’s talk, the U.S. Government announced that a nuclear weapo’ fest has been scheduled for Eniwetok in the Pacific Ocean about May 1. It MONSIGNOR HIGGINS On March 14 George Meany, president of the AFL-CIO, stated in a public address that “we (in the American labor o v e ent) believe in the capitali s i system ... a mortal sin in the eyes r.I some of our E u o a on friends.” This statement so typical of Meany’s bluntness, which has earned him the admiration and re spect of friend and for alike calls for a word of explana tion. Mr. Meany obviously did not mean to imply that the Amer ic abor movement believes in any old kind of capitalism without distinctions or qualifi cations. Capitalism has many different definitions. It means one thing in the colonial areas for example, and another in the United States. Even with in the United States it means different things to different people. In the sense in which Mr. Meany uses the term it stands for a system of private ownership regulated through collective bargaining and leg islation. according to the norms of "decency and mor ality.” Wh«f Kind of Capitalism On the one hand, it means the very opposite of Socialism. On the other it does not mean “free enterprise” in the sense in which that much abused term is so often used in the conserv ative wing of the American press. Nor does it mean that American labor is completely satisfied with its present role in the American economy. American labor is not inter ested in co-management or co determination in the German usage of these terms. It is in favor of. and will continue tn fight for, the expansion nf col lective bargaining to cover all matters directly affecting the welfare of the workers. “Those Pontiff's Penetrating Knowledge was not said directly that this will he an H-bomb, but the an nouncement that it would be a “megaton range nuclear de tonation” (the equivalent of a million tons of TNT), led to this assumption. The day alter that, the Unit ed States put before Russia a new disarmament proposal aim ed al eventually “decreasing the nuclear threat over the world.” The proposal called for a nuclear census providing data of the possession of fis sionable materials, the produc tion of such materials, the pos session of nuclear weapons, and the planning of tests for nuc lear weapons. The day that this proposal was made the U.S. Navy an nounced that its air-to-surface guided missile. “Petrel,” will perform with "a degree of re liability considered exception ally high” Also in his Easter Sunday discourse. Pope Pius XII warn ed against the machinations of “the enemy of peace,” saying No Time for Exaggeration matters,” Mr, Meany recently staled, “that do not touch a worker directly, a union cannot and will not challenge hut where management deci sions affect a worker directly, a union will intervene.” In summary, the kind of cap italism endorsed by the Amer ican labor movement is pro gressive. even “radical” in the bes| sense of the word. Flattering to Church It is important to emphasize this point if only to counter act the relentless criticism which Marxists at home and abroad continue to direct at the American labor movement. According to the Marxist line, the American labor movement is hopelessly reactionary and therefore is not to be trusted by the working people of the United States, much less by the proletariat of poorer coun tries. It i termed “reactionary” because it believes in “capital ism" and is opposed to the class struggle. The Marxists, and particular ly the Communists, are in the hahil of blaming the Catholic Church in large measure for American labor's continued sup port of “capitalism” and its opposition to the class strug gle. William Z. Foster says that “typically in the recently merge two federations into AFL-CIO (December 1955), the leading eight man Executive Committee contains no less than four Catholics." This is a typical, if somewhat ungrammatical, expression of the Communist Party line with regard to the American labor movement and the Catholic Church and the relationship of tween the two. It is very flatter ing to the Catholic Church, but very unfair to the millions of non-Catholic members of the AFLCIO whn thoroughly agree with the philosophy of that or ganization as expressed by Mr. Meany and are instinctively op posed tn the philosophy of the class struggle. he “exerts pressure to sow con tusion in minus.” While His Holiness did not mention So viet Russia, his words were tak en here to be a powerful de scription of the tactics employ ed by communism in its "cold war” against the Free World. Speaking at a new conference held two days later. U.S. Sec retary of State John Foster Dulles said the current "down grading of Stalin” hy the pres ent rulers in the Kremlin does not of itself demonstrate that the Soviet regime has bas ically changed its domestic or foreign policies.” He added that one can hope “for changes more fundamental than any that have so far been reveal ed,” but that this country would maintain a cautious at titude in the whole matter. The Easter message was an other of the multitudinous oc casions on which the Holy Father has shown an acute and penetrating knowledge of world affairs on a strikingly broad basis. Mr. Foster’s attack on the American lahor movement serves to emphasize again the importance of telling American labor’s story to the rest of the world as clearly as possible. Foster in this country and many other Marxists (in cluding some Socialists) in Eu rope and Asia are determined to destroy the influence of American labor by identifying it with “capitalism” which, for their own purposes, they equaie with everything that is anti-soc ial and injurious to the wel fare of the working people. The only way to counteract this kind of propaganda is to take the trouble to explain—as Meany does on the average of once a week in articles and speeches precisely what is meant by capitalism in the American sense of the word. There are two Americans who currently have the chance of a lifetime to tell the story of American labor and Ameri can capitalism to the working people of the world Walter Reuther, president of the Unit ed Automobile Workers, pres ently touring India as the hon ored guest of the Indian labor movement, and Charles H. Smith. Jr., a Cleveland indus trialist just appointed head of the U. S. Employer Delegation to the International I^ibor Or ganization. Delicate Assignments Reuther may be tempted in In dia to undersell the American economical system by exagger ating its faults and imperfec tions. or by minimizing the gains American labor has made during the past 25 years. Mr. Smith, in turn, may be tempted in the I.L.O. to exag gerate the merits and the ac complishments of the American economic system, and to under estimate the merits and accom plishments of other economic systems in other parts of the world. This is no time for either management nr lahor tn indulge in the luxury nf exag geratrd praise nr blame of American capitalism. such Inquiry Corner Q. If a person is married out nf the Church because of a previous marriage but the chil dren are being reared as Ca tholics what can such a person pray for? It seems the only so lution is the death of the first wife, but that can scarcely be the object of prayer! A. Such a situation is a com mentary on the need for pray er, reflection and prudence in choice of a partner in the first place. Many young Catholics ill not accept the fact that at tractive partners are not al ways convinced of the perman ence of marriage or of Chris tian principles for the married state. When a true marriage has been entered upon, however, the Catholic is then bound until death to that union. In the sit uation you suggest it is obvious that there is another—although a tragic and drastic solution— course that is called for. The presence of children make it much more difficult and naturally sneaking extremely unlikely but the Christian solution is the dissolution of the second (invalid) marriage or at least some kind of separation. For No one need lament the fail ure of the United States Sen ate to approve the proposal that was be fore it recent ly for chang ing the meth od of elect ing a Presi dent and Vice President. The present system a y not be ideal, but the re jected amendment would have been no improvement. On the contrary, it would have accent uated some of the faults of the existing system. As we now elect a President, the candidate who receives a plurality of the 531 electoral votes is declared the winner, the entire electoral vote of each state going to the candi date who polls the greater number of the stale's popular votes. For this system the amend ment would have substituted optional methods of allocating the electoral vote of each state in the proportion of the pop ular vote received by each can didate. Each state would have heen permitted to choose which of the two methods it wished to follow. The simpler of the two would have given each candidate the proportion of the state's electoral vote that his share of the popular vote bore to the total popular vote. For Instance Thus, in the state of New York, for example, a candidate who received 51 per cent of the popular vote would have been credited with 51 per cent of the state’s 45 electoral votes, while his rival would have been credited with 49 per cent. The second method would have made the Congressional district the unit for allocating the electoral vote. Each candi date would have received one electoral vote for each Con gressional district in which he had a plurality of the popular vote. And the candidate who received the largest share of the popular vote statewide would have received an addi tional two voles. Th« Why of Chang* Many arguments were ad vanced during the Senate de hate as to why the election machinery should have been changed. But the one on which the Senate’s action really turn ed was that the existing sys tem permits minority groups in the populous states to in fluence disproportionately the outcome of Presidential elec tions. A Congressman from a Southern state, for example, urged that the present system “accentuates the building up and solidification within these states of relngioua, economic Father pal ay------------------ complicated moral questions, however, the pastor should be consulted. Assuming, as we must from observation of many who are living in invalid marriages, that a Catholic is so involved and is not prepared to take the step mentioned above he can only pray for God's mercy and hope that God will grant him a solution. He cer tainly cannot pray for death of the first wife or husband direct ly. but he can pray- for a solu tion that would not destroy the “second” family and the lives of the children, even though the death of the other party non Id seem to be the only way. Q. What pood did it do if Christ adeemed us if we can still be lost? 1 believe that He meant what He said: He who believe., and is baptized shall he saved (Mark 16:16). A. The redeeming sacrificial death of Christ made salvation available and possible for all, but did not destroy man’s free dom. We have the beginning of eternal life (called sanctifying grace) in our souls by baptism, but Christ made clear that it JOHN C. O'RRIEN was not necessarily permanent. Often He referred to the good and bad fish in the Church, to the good wheat and the weeds, etc., indicating e separ ation of good members of the Church (i.e. all the haotized) from the bad. In Lent we re call His words. "And he w'ho does not take up his cross and follow me, is not worthy of me.” (Matthew 10:38) The fa mous passage in St. James’ Epis tl can be cited among others: “You see that by works man is justified, and not by faith only.” (James 2:14-26) Election As Usual Q. Do we have any of the or iginal copies of the New Testa ment books? It not how do we know that we have accurate copies? A. We know from the Bihle as history—and it ranks with the best historical source* apart from its religious content that Christ established his div inity by public and evident mir acles that He established a Chur-h. We know that that Church spoke and continues to speak for Him and that it au thoritatively listed the hooks of the Bible, approving them as authentic in their substance. W« know from history too that we have authentic copies, veri fied by such authorities as Pa pias early in the second cen tury to St. Irenaeus (140-202 A.D.) The widespread use nf the hooks of the New Testa ment by Christian and pagan authors (e.g. the Epicurean philosopher Celsus about 178 A.D.) in the second century is part of the proof of the authen tic dates and texts. People who disagreed on the meaning and on practically everything else (e.g. early rebels or heretics within the Christian Church) agreed on the actual texts. Mod ern research has uncovered abundant evidence of their au thenticity. with fragments going hack to the second and third centuries. There are more than 12,000 ancient manuscripts of the four Gospels, of which al most 2,500 are manuscripts of the original Greek and all are substantially in agreement. Send questions to Father Ed ward F. Healey. Inquiry Cor ner, Catholic Times. Box 636, Columbus (16). Ohio. and racial blocs which caw and do hold the balance of pow’er.” The Southerner complained that the candidates of the ma jor parties now are compelled to pay too much attention 1o the views of Negroes in the big Northern cities, to the “radical wing” of organized labor, to the Jews, the Italians, lhe Irish and the Poles. These groups in the big cities, he* pointed out. are capable of tipping the popular vote in fa vor of a given candidate and thus assuring him of the state's entire electoral vote. Populous Stafot From this line of argument it is evident that the aim of those who advocated a division of the electoral vote in accord, ance with the division of the popular vote, was to reduce the influence of the so-called min ority groups in the urban cen ters. As a matter of fact, however, the argument that the existing system gives the populous states undue influence in elec tions will not stand examin ation. Actually, these states ria not have as strong a voice as they should have, considering their populations, and the pro posed change in the election system would have reduced their influence still further. In the 1952 election. 39 states having less than half the nation’s population con trolled 294 electoral votes, while nine large states contain ing more than half the popula tio». controlled only 237 elec total votes. On* Party Statas If either of the optional methods proposed in ths amendment had been in opera tion in 1952. the net effect would have heen to reduce the electoral votes credited to President Eisenhower and to increase those allocated to Stevenson, hut without affect ing the outcome of the elec tion. Neither plan would have rec tified the disparity between the influence of the small as against the large states. The sole gainers would have been the Southern states and a few states in New England and the M.dwest which are dominated hy one party. With only token opposition from the other party, these one-party states would have been able still to deliver all, or nearly all. of their electoral votes to one candidate. But the influence of the large states would have been diminished, since they would have had to divide their electoral votes among two candidates. Fortunately, a sufficient number nf Senators sixed-up the scheme for what it was to. block it* adoption.