By Mary Lackie

The Church has used the layman as door-bell puncher and fund-raiser, but for generations has overlooked his special talents, said Leo J. Zuber, Jr.

Zuber, has done his fair share of fund-raising, discussed the lay diaconate, vocations, the Baltimore Cathechism mentality, and the challenge of Vatican II in an interview.

The well-known Catholic layman is a member of the Archdiocesan Religious Unity Commission, the Board of Development, and former book review editor of the Bulletin.

Zuber said, “I am delighted that the U.S. bishops agreed to ask Rome for the lay diaconate. In my experience speaking before Catholic groups, the Church suffers in some degree because the layman has not been an active participant. Churches are filled every Sunday with laymen -- professional men and men who have special talents and skills. What effort is ever made to channel this talent? There is no challenge to going around punching doorbells for a building fund every four or five years. It’s got to be done, but the appeal is limited.”

“Notice the new Atlanta skyline. It was put there by laymen of all denominations working together with talents and skills. How little of that talent has been siphoned off into the affairs of the Church?”

Zuber hopes the diaconate is approved and that Georgia will be among the first served by deacons. He said, “I am confident that I would be interested in going into the diaconate.”

In his opinion, past concerns of the laymen have been oriented toward one thing -- the parish plant. Zuber said, “We are too concerned with this investment. We don’t dare not to be concerned with it. And not one grain of sand or sliver of wood in that parish plant will ever get to heaven. But what is our job? To get to heaven and make earth a little more like heaven.”

Parish schools could be incorporated into the public school system or converted to some other purpose, Zuber said. “If sisters have particular gifts in teaching, it is far more important that this gift be shared widely in the community with Catholics, Protestants and Jews and not limited to the precincts of the Catholic ghetto school.”

“If girls could see nuns dressed in business clothes, using their own names, giving as much to their community as they could and still leading a life of dedication in a religious cause, the effect on vocations would be widespread,” he said. “The nun’s field today is not just the cozy kitchen garden, it is the field in the far forty.”

Children today are growing up in entirely different circumstances and are being educated in a different way. “They are going to want more freedom than they have had in the past. The opportunity for vocations is greater than it ever was, but our structure of religious mentality is the old traditional one and has attraction to a very few girls.”

Zuber, who said he has always rebelled against the Baltimore Catechism mentality, noted a “massive change” in book tastes since he first began book reviewing in 1949.

He said, “Catholic publishers used to be pietistic. People apparently lapped up books of a pious and uplifting nature. You couldn’t give those books away now. Today, people are writing on theology, but not ‘in the shop.’ It used to be a closed communication -- priests talking to other priests -- now, men like Hans Kung are talking to the layman.”

During his 13 years as reviewer and book review editor, Zuber built a methodical system for book selections, files of reviewers, and correspondence with publishers. The Zubers received 25 copies of the Bulletin a week. They would clip the reviews and sort them on the dining room table and mail copies to the publishers and authors. Zuber said, “As a side effect of this book review effort, I have taken boxes of books to the Trappist monastery, St. Thomas More school, and the D’Youville library.”

Hundreds of books were reviewed in the column by about 25 volunteer reviewers including authors, artists, priests, religious and editors. They selected books from a list sent to them by Zuber. How did he find his reviewers? Zuber said, “I used to sniff these people out. Flannery O’Connor most often chose material from theology books.” The Zuber family visited the O’Connor home in Milledgeville. Zuber recalled, “Flannery was always interested in her livestock. The geese had the run of the yard, and when she had visitors, they would know there was company and line up in hierarchical order, parading past the porch, honking, and then disappear around the side of the house. She loved to watch the peafowl and had a Mexican and Sicilian burro.”

The former editor said the book, “Shepherd in the Midst” by the priest, Edward Boyd Barrett, had a quiet influence on him. “Barrett left the Church and was reconciled to it before his death. His book is a no-holds-barred account of his efforts to drag down the Church. During the 1930’s he was vehemently anti-Catholic and he never could see what it was that pulled him back.

“I believe that Barrett was the precursor of many priests today. They leave the ministry, but they don’t leave the Church. They still consider themselves Catholics. I would hope that every priest who is leaving the ministry or considering it, could read this book.” Zuber spoke of priests who perhaps did not foresee the results of their efforts, but who paved the way for Vatican II. “Vatican II would never have been the success it was, nor would we be living in times as good as they are, difficult as they are, if it had not been for the work of these men who prepared the soil.” He categorized the priests in two groups, “There were those men out on the dusty roads in trailers trying to take the sacraments to Catholics. Msgr. Cassidy, Msgr. Moylan, and others like them who probably never wrote a book. And there were men like Gustave Weigel and de Chardin who made their contribution through literature. Their names will be remembered.” Zuber said, “Our life span isn’t so great. It is important that we, as alive, alert, and hopefully intelligent laymen can leave a heritage our children can build on later. Our children will be building the spires. We are trying to dip the foundations or shore them up. We should be proud to be here, and in the years to come, be proud to say that we were there, hopefully helping.