|
On a dozen fronts, Christians and Jews are carrying the message of
the Gospel or Torah into streets, meetings, newspapers, neighborhood and urban
boards. Watching them, some good folks are scandalized - they should stay
in the pulpits. Others are heartened to see the Church more relevant to
modern life.
There is no one Catholic answer to this involvement. If we begin
with Our Lord, we find ourselves involved in casting money - changers out of
the Temple. We are blessed when we suffer persecution for justice sake.
We are commissioned to enkindle the fire that Christ cast on the earth.
But we lack Our Lords perception and His humility. Our
motives are not as pure as His. Moreover, He is Wisdom incarnate, the Son of
God become man. So we start out with good intentions only to find that often
the road leads us far from heaven.
What are some of todays religious leaders saying about this
new engagement of the Church (her laity, her ministers) in the world?
Reverend John Harmon, Episcopalian, says this: The
Churchs central function is to live within the world, not outside of it.
Yet an imperialism can develop: pedagogic (the Church alone has, or should
have, the answer to every issue); programmatic (the Church has a programmatic
way of responding to such issues). Father Robert Reicher, Catholic,
states: Problems arise, for me, when the clergyman states he is speaking
in the name of the Church or if he uses the Church to obtain institutional or
structural reforms in society.
Rabbi Richard Hirsch sees a danger that the heady
exhilaration of demonstrations may cause us to forget the slow, arduous task of
improving human relations.
Father George Higgins, NCWC, counts two good reasons for being
selective about the causes worthy of organized, visible support
from religious bodies. One, the more often we demonstrate, the less
impact each occasion will have on public attitudes; too churchmen
must be sure they have the facts, and that a clear-cut moral issue is involved
rather than an honest difference of opinion. It would be foolish to give
neutral place to issues that call up the very justice of Gods society.
Racial discrimination, economic suffocation, destruction of marriage and family
life are clearly moral issues - and there is a Catholic solution.
But it would be equally foolish to carry moral judgment to every
single provocation or to every technical solution. This particular racial
demonstration, this conflict between management and labor, that national
traditions of married life -- these are not always clearly judged. Both sides
must be humble and fair-minded.
In between is a twilight area where the answers are not clear at
all. Free speech must be balanced over against filthy literature. Is
fluoridation of water an emotional hysteria or a scheme to poison American
people? Vietnam has no easy solution -- does the clergy know the facts, and
does he realize his responsibility as proportionate to the presidents? In
inviting your letters, I suggest these comments be considered:
(1). Should the laity rather than clergy provide the
presence of the Church in these temporal conflicts?
(2). Do we need to update Pope Pius XIs norm: the Church
should speak on moral principles but not on technical details? Please write me
your opinions on the questions: Should the Church become involved in temporal
crisis? Involved how far?
Whats That Again?
The heading was definite but startling:-
Atlanta Catholics Have Their Own Church For First Time
Somehow it didnt look right for Apostolate among the
Peachtrees. Theres been a church here since 1837, a dozen parishes
since the 1930s and a Cathedral since 1937. Hows that again -
Atlanta gets its own Church.
Right city, wrong state. The headline, story and photographs were
from Atlanta, Texas.
Best wishes, and may God bless this new parish out among the
cactus. They may not have the Braves, or Coke or Lockheed. But any town in
Texas called Atlanta must be the best of two possible worlds!
The parish is probably sitting on top of an oil well. Tithing,
anyone?
Paul J. Hallinan
Archbishop of Atlanta |