The qualities necessary for a successful long
term commitment must be
cultivated in the individuals prior to marriage.

Choices for young adults

By Arthur G. Quinn

n After the year 2005, single person households could become the most common in the United States. Never before in American history has living alone been the predominant lifestyle.1 This is the reality in which we find American society, which affects the Catholic Church in the United States. This expanding population of single adults is critical to the future of the Church.2 In the Catholic faith, only single people can receive the sacraments of vocation—Matrimony and Holy Orders. Only single adults can take religious vows. It follows that integrating single Catholics into the life of parishes should be very important to all Catholics, as this segment of the population is the only source of vocations.
Single people have not received a positive moral interpretation in our society. In the Church, as long as ministry continues to focus exclusively on marriage and family life, prejudices against single adults will continue.3 Single adults are labeled as irresponsible and selfish.4 Misconceptions about single people flourish among married people who are unwilling to gain understanding of how single people live in reality. Single people are denied work in certain ministries due to suspicion simply because they are single. They are denied the same trust that is given to others who are considered “normal.”5 Single adults are left out of the Church and parishes are thereby impoverished. Once the overlooked become the included, then they and the community as a whole are enriched, reflecting what St. Paul calls the Body of Christ.6
A mutual perception of equality is essential to breaking down barriers of prejudice and misunderstanding. It is very clear that all Christians in any state of life are called to the fullness of Christian life and to the perfection of love.7 All Christians embark on a journey at Baptism to follow Christ. Our universal vocation is to be Christians. Paul states that no one part of the mystical Body of Christ is less important, less needed or less equal (1 Cor. 12:14-22). In God’s Kingdom there are no distinctions (Gal. 3:28).
Obstacles to single people being treated with equity lie in the historical tradition of marriage as being of greater importance. Marriage is equated with settling down.8 This obviously implies that single people are unsettled. The U.S. Catholic bishops have suggested that marriage commences adulthood for young people.9 Single people themselves have accepted this social stigma and long for marriage as their only alternative.10 This is evidenced by the proliferation of personal ads and dating services aimed at solving the “problem” of being single.11
This perceived problem intensifies the negative social stigma attached to being single. Single Catholics have expressed concern that priests, who are also single, have difficulty relating to single adults.12 Do priests view the single population as a problem to be solved or as a precious gift just as it is?13 This fundamental attitude of priests and all the faithful will determine how single adults will be treated in a community.
Some communities have adopted a more compassionate attitude. For example, St. Jude Parish in Boca Raton, Florida established a service called FIND (Friends In New Directions), aimed at keeping single Catholics active and involved in the parish community.14 This locally oriented group also aims to foster solid, Christian relationships among people with similar beliefs and values.
A nationally oriented service, Single Catholics OnLine (SCOL), based in New Jersey, aims to connect single Catholics through the Internet. One of the principal aims of SCOL is to “help single Catholics fulfill their vocation of marriage.”15 SCOL is certainly preferable to the corporate mainstream services but there is an implied pressure to marry for single Catholics.
This pressure bombards single adults from all directions. Parental pressure to marry is intense. It can either drive single people into a marriage to please the family or can harm the single person’s self esteem for remaining single.16 Parents feel they are “losing face” among their peers if they have single adult children, tending to perceive their single children as immature and in need of parenting.17 Married people in general feel obliged to find partners for their single friends and relatives.18 Introductions are arranged and are expected to provide a happy ending, relieving single people of their “condition” and making everyone comfortable. Society addresses the needs of single adults with a variety of resources that advise single people to “package” themselves for the marriage market. People are conditioned to promote themselves with the intention of attracting a mate, presenting themselves as anything but what they really are.19 Our society fosters the skill of the hunt without emphasis on long term commitment. Perhaps this perpetuates the high rate of divorce. This pressure to marry impedes the freedom of single adults to be themselves and enjoy it. If single adults are not truly free to be single, then they are neither truly free to choose marriage.20
Singleness is the first normal state for every Christian and is the first duty of every single person until the reasons for marriage become apparent.21 Marriage should not be pursued as an end in itself. Single people are often advised to go out and socialize, join clubs or even change jobs just to find a mate.22 Structuring one’s life around a narrow agenda can be very precarious since underlying loyalties are principally towards an alternate motive. Pursuing such ends implies that the good of the individual is determined only by marriage at the expense of social and professional activities. Socializing, memberships, careers and marriage are all good things that should be sought completely free of pressures. This contributes to an individual’s self control and wholeness. Marriage does not complete a person. One must be whole first.23
Catholics are waiting longer to marry for a number of reasons. The current high rate of divorce is popularly seen as a deterrent to making hasty marital decisions. From a more positive perspective, single adults see the single life as the means of discovering self fulfillment prior to making long term commitments. This trend may prove to eventually curtail the huge growth in the single population due to a lower divorce rate in the future. Those single adults that eventually marry will be more mature and capable of commitment.24 Specifically, statistics indicate an increase in the number of women attending college, a related rise in the age of first marriage, and an increase in the number of adults choosing to remain single.25
With so much attention to marriage, the choice of remaining single has been largely unexplored. According to Canon Law, whatever one’s condition in life, the same holiness is to be pursued in it as in any other situation in life.26 This makes no distinctions among people. Furthermore, the Church recognizes the single life, which “strives appropriately to reveal the form of Christ in and to the world.”27 This recognition indicates the quality of a vocation. “The vocation of the single life makes itself felt in the most diverse manners, as infinitely varied as are the modulations of the divine voice.”28 The condition of the divine voice should be seen as critical. It is the Lord that calls us by name. It is personal and only the individual should determine what that call is suggesting, and how the gift of a vocation is to be expressed. It is pastorally insensitive to declare that one has or does not have a vocation to the single life. Saying someone has that gift may cause that person to avoid relationships. Saying someone does not have that gift may cause that person to either feel inadequate for remaining single or to launch a frantic pursuit of some other path.29 If any vocation is a gift from God, that gift should be the grace to walk through life without worrying about what to do.30 “Be concerned above everything else with the Kingdom of God and with what God requires of you, and you will be provided with all other things. Do not worry about tomorrow”(Matt. 6:33-34). This is freedom. Even if the single life is anticipated to be temporary, while single, all Christians must follow the Lord’s call fervently.31
The U.S. Catholic bishops have stated that the single life can be a true vocation from God.32 However this lifestyle, which is universally experienced by all Catholics at some time in their lives, is barely mentioned in explicit terms in either the Catechism or the Code of Canon Law. Catholics have few basic resources to be informed about living the Christian life as a single person. There should be preparation for single adult life in religious education classes. Even if the single life is not anticipated to be life long, young people should know how to live fully Christian lives as single people until the reasons become clear to pursue another vocation.33
Promoting the single life is in no way intended to displace the importance of marriage, priesthood or religious life. However, the Church needs to recognize more clearly the validity of the single life in the world as a call that is equally sacred.34
From the very beginning of the Church there have been men and women who have renounced the great good of marriage to follow the Lamb, wherever he goes, to be intent on the things of the Lord, to seek to please him, and to go out to meet the Bridegroom who is coming.35
This is similar to the theological reference to the single life as the state of eschatological tension.36 Jesus reminds us that there is no marriage in the Kingdom (Matt. 22:23-33). “The celibate person anticipates in his or her flesh the new world of the future resurrection.”37 In this way, single people can bear witness to this eschatological hope by living full lives as individuals, using their freedom to pursue the affairs of the Lord (1 Cor. 7:32). Single people have the freedom to take the risks necessary to bring about the Kingdom of God.38
Christians, in general, are called to live according to a radical quality. They live in this world but are not of this world (John 15:18-19). Christians living as single people further this quality as contradicting the accepted norm of marriage. Only those to whom it is given can accept this (Matt. 19:11-12).
In the single life of a Christian, the practice of chastity, to which all the baptized are called,39 is in effect a celibate life.
Chastity consists in the long term integration of one’s thoughts, feelings, and actions in a way that values, esteems and respects the dignity of oneself and of others. Chastity frees us from the tendency to act in a manipulative or exploitive manner in our relationships and enables us to show true love and kindness always.40
This assertion shapes and illustrates a very positive practice of life. The terms chastity and celibacy may evoke an image of rigid abstinence and self denial, and on those who practice these qualities, there may be a projected image of dispassionate and even impotent people. Celibacy should be motivated from the heart and rooted in spirituality.41 Chastity preserves our sexual life for real pledged love.42
Our society teaches otherwise. It is popularly proclaimed that sex saves. Christian values are becoming a social atheism in this regard.43 There is also tremendous pressure from society to accept this proclamation, especially from peers. Peer pressure to experience sex is not only enormous but also intolerant. Those that wish to live chaste lives are ridiculed and made to feel guilty.44 In a society that places so much importance on freedom to choose, a double standard emerges if one chooses against popular opinion.
Our culture equates sexual experience with adulthood.45 Sex is a rite of passage for many. What is called making love can be very unloving and almost totally an exercise in self gratification. As self gratification increases, the possibility of becoming oblivious to the other person involved also increases.46 Rushing into sexual experience reduces the awareness of its nature as a beautiful gift from God and trivializes its value to each person’s identity.47 Sexuality is the encounter of intimacy and vulnerability. It is the opportunity to embrace each other, not use each other.48
Many people have sought this expression as cohabiting couples. The U.S. Catholic bishops define cohabitation as a “couple who have been living together at least four nights a week for an extended period of time in which there is a commitment to each other and a recognition that together they form, in a certain sense, a family.”49 This living arrangement, which is growing rapidly, is a recent product of high divorce rates, women’s liberation, availability of birth control and lack of interest in raising children.50
Couples that choose to cohabit, justify their living arrangement by rationalizing that the risk of divorce is too great to marry without first living together.51 Many cohabiting couples view their living arrangement as a step away from promiscuity and towards commitment.52 This may be reasonable if the individuals have been promiscuous in the past and are attempting to act in a more monogamous manner. Couples may choose this lifestyle as a prelude to a planned marriage, as a trial to assist in the decision of marriage, or for its own sake.53 For whatever reason, our society considers this acceptable.
From the perspective of long term effects, there is in fact no advantage to cohabitation before marriage. Cohabiting couples tend to withhold true commitment from one another. The experiment avoids the decision to form and sustain a permanent relationship. Cohabiting couples may tend to speak and behave cautiously to avoid criticizing each other, and to repress anger.54 Young adults that have cohabited are likely to desire few children, if any, and are more tolerant of divorce. These couples are also more likely to delay the decision to marry than couples that live apart.55 Cohabiting couples also have a higher risk of domestic abuse than those that are dating while living apart, and this tendency is brought into marriage.56
People that cohabit describe themselves as more independent, more free from traditional sex role stereotypes, more liberal attitudes in general, more interested in risk taking or experimental lifestyles, more sexually experienced and less religious. These characteristics correlate less with lifelong marriages.57 People that cohabit tend to be over 25, already divorced, living in urban areas, risk oriented and usually do not plan ahead. What is meant by risk oriented is that there is usually a problem with drugs, alcohol, sexual behavior, money, law or unemployment.58 If the couple has the tendency to experiment with relationships, that tendency remains in marriage.59 Living together leaves a back door for a quick exit. Living with this option develops an affinity for the same idea of an exit, which is brought into marriage. Commitment has the element of risk but that risk is reduced by communicating and making an informed decision. Cohabitation shelves the risk so no one deals with it head on until marriage.60
One of the most important reasons for choosing cohabitation is the fear of divorce. This is certainly an ordeal that should be avoided. Many young people may have witnessed a divorce within their own families or may have suffered the experience themselves. It is justified on that basis to cohabit first. Are they right? Reported findings of studies have shown that couples that cohabited prior to marriage are more likely to divorce than those that lived apart.61 Statistics show that the divorce rate is 33% - 50% higher among couples that lived together before marriage. The longer the period of cohabitation, the higher the risk.62
It is important to educate the faithful regarding these risk factors. It is also important to educate the faithful what formula does work for a good, Christian marriage. People that abstained from sexual relations prior to marriage are less likely to divorce.63 Living apart during the courtship allows greater objectivity and reflection, which is necessary to make an irrevocable commitment to marriage.64 Couples living apart before marriage tend to adjust to marriage with greater success. They also tend to perceive a higher quality of marital communication and satisfaction.65 The qualities necessary for a successful long term commitment must be cultivated in the individuals prior to marriage.66 If people are in the habit of making and keeping commitments, that habit is brought into a relationship, contributing a level of certainty that eliminates any fear of divorce.
Cohabiting couples that approach the Church, seeking sacramental marriage, offer a pastoral opportunity for ministers to educate them.
Pope John Paul II recommends a pastoral approach to dealing with cohabiting couples: examine each case on an individual basis; contact them tactfully and respectfully; correct them charitably; witness to them so they may regularize their situation. Ministers should encourage the couple to live apart, pray, prepare to receive the sacrament of reconciliation and attend mass.67
The determining factor for Christian marriage is the intention of the couple. Their desire for marriage must be in good faith.68 Couples are advised to separate but are not required to do so, particularly if they are legally married or have a child. The only justification for a minister to delay a marriage is if there are doubts that the couple is not properly disposed and prepared for Christian marriage.69
Couples must give themselves to Christ, who sustains, purifies and ennobles the engagement and marriage. In this way, premarital chastity takes on its full meaning and rules out cohabitation and premarital sex.70
Again, the call to chastity for all Christians becomes an instant conflict with society. In May 1998, legislation passed in the city of Philadelphia giving cohabiting couples equal legal status to married couples.71 Similar legislation is pending in the city of New York.72 In Canada, every province has now passed legislation sanctioning “alternative lifestyles.”73 This era of history is characterized by a shift in accepted moral authority. Now, if it is legal, it is also moral.74
This adds to the dilemma of single Catholics. Although cohabiting couples may still be considered legally single, meaning in the secular world that they are available to marry, their status as a couple is gaining prestige. The pressure to marry is extended to a pressure to cohabit, because society claims it is better than living alone. Society offers young people many acceptable options: to cohabit, to be a single parent, to have multiple sex partners,75 and it is acceptable. There are little or no social consequences to do anything except practice chastity. The challenge both to Church teaching and to single Catholics practicing their faith is to be Catholic in society.
The lure of the so-called consumer society is so strong among young people that they become totally dominated and imprisoned by an individualistic, materialistic and hedonistic interpretation of human existence. This is particularly reflected in that outlook on human sexuality according to which sexuality’s dignity in service to communion and the reciprocal donation between persons becomes degraded and thereby reduced to nothing more than a consumer good.76
A deeply reflective attitude is needed for single people on the very basic ideal of humans having been created in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1:26). As mentioned in the beginning of this essay, single people are the only source of vocations of all kinds. Their personal efforts to manifest God’s likeness in the world will provide for future Christian marriages, future clergy, future religious and, of course, single adult Christians. There is no better way to manifest this likeness than to imitate Christ. “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). It is by this standard that all Christians are called to live.    n

1 “Alone in America,” Futurist 29:5 (September/October 1995), 56.
2 Kay Collier-Slone, Single in the Church: New Ways to Minister with 52% of God’s People (New York: The Alban Institute, 1992), 1.
3 Rodney J. Hunter, ed., Dictionary of Pastoral Counseling, s.v. “Single persons, Pastoral care of” (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1990), 1183.
4 Pennsylvania Interchurch Conference, “Single in the Church,” Origins 22:47 (May 16, 1983), 803.
5 Helena Wilkinson, Beyond Singleness: How to Make Better Relationships (London: Marshall Pickering, 1995), 90.
6 Herbert Weber, “The Parish’s Overlooked, Invisible Members,” the Florida Catholic: Palm Beach Diocese 58:40 (September 25, 1997), 23.
7 Lumen Gentium, November 21, 1964, art. 40, in Vatican Council II: the Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, ed. Austin Flannery (Boston: St. Paul Editions, 1980), 397.
8 Wilberta L. Chinn, Singles Sorting It Out (Whittier, CA: Peacock Enterprises, 1991), 134.
9 National Conference of Catholic Bishops (hereafter NCCB), Sons and Daughters of the Light: a Pastoral Plan for Ministry with Young Adults (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1996), 58; from note 9, “A ‘youth’ could be anyone from approximately age 15 to age 25, or until marriage”(emphasis added).
10 Sheron C. Patterson, “Singles and the Church,” Quarterly Review 12:4 (Winter 1992), 46.
11 Lee Reilly, Women Living Single (Prince Frederick, MD: Recorded Books, Inc., 1997), Tape 6, side 1, set of seven cassettes.
12 Judy Ball, “Does Anyone Give a Damn About Single Catholics?” U.S. Catholic 42:5 (May 1977), 10.
13 Douglas L. Fagerstrom, ed., Baker Handbook of Single Adult Ministry (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997), 150-151.
14 Irene Hey, “Singles Look to Church to Help Find a Companion,” the Florida Catholic: Palm Beach Diocese 59:29 (May 28, 1998), 11.
15 María Ruiz Scaperlanda, “A Marriage Made in Cyberspace?” Our Sunday Visitor 87:15 (August 9, 1998), 13.
16 Sheron C. Patterson, 46.
17 Wilberta L. Chinn, 132.
18 Helena Wilkinson, 97.
19 Lee Reilly, Tape 2, side 2.
20 Rodney Clapp, Families at the Crossroads: Beyond Traditional and Modern Options (Leicester, England: Inter Varsity Press, 1993), 107.
21 Dorothy Gish, “Ministry, Single File,” Asbury Seminarian 39:4 (Fall/Winter 1984), 17.
22 Wilberta L. Chinn, 127.
23 Harold Ivan Smith, Single and Feeling Good (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1987), 18.
24 Janet Duccilli, “The Single Life—How Swinging?” St. Anthony Messenger 85:2 (July 1977), 30.
25 Peter J. Stein, ed., Single Life: Unmarried Adults in Social Context (New York: St. Martins Press, 1981), 30.
26 James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green and Donald E. Heintschel, eds., The Code of Canon Law: a Text and Commentary (New York: Paulist Press, 1985), Canon 210, commentary.
27 John P. McIntyre, “Lineamenta for a Christian Anthropology: Canons 208-223,” Periodica de Re Canonica 85:2 (1996), 270.
28 Michael Chinigo, The Pope Speaks: the Teachings of Pope Pius XII (New York: Pantheon Books, Inc., 1957), 57; Address to Women of Catholic Action, October 21, 1945.
29 Albert Y. Hsu, Singles at the Crossroads: a Fresh Perspective on Christian Singleness (Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 1997), 55.
30 Michelle McKinney Hammond, What to Do Until Love Finds You (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publications, 1997), 9.
31 Roger Repohl, “The Spirituality of Singleness,” America 135:17 (November 27, 1976), 366.
32 NCCB, “Behold Your Mother: Women of Faith,” November 21, 1973, in Pastoral Letters of the United States Catholic Bishops, vol. 3, edited by Hugh J. Nolan (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1983), 449, art. 145.
33 John Deedy, “Never Married Singles: Parishes Aren’t Only for Pairs,” U.S. Catholic 48:7 (July 1983), 27.
34 Manual para el Católico de Hoy: Creencias, Prácticas, Oraciones (Liguori, MO: Liguori Publications, 1978): 70, translation into English by author.
35 Catechism of the Catholic Church (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1992), art. 1618.
36 Edward Schillebeeckx, Marriage: Human Reality and Saving Mystery (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1965), 125.
37 John Paul II, Familiaris Consortio, November 22, 1981, in Church Documents: Conciliar and Post Conciliar (Boston: Pauline Software, 1997), art. 16, CD-ROM.
38 Roger Repohl, 367.
39 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2348.
40 NCCB, Human Sexuality: a Catholic Perspective for Education and Lifelong Learning (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1990), 19.
41 Sean Sammon, An Undivided Heart: Making Sense of Celibate Chastity (Canfield, OH: Society of St. Paul, 1997), videocassette.
42 Love is for Life: a Pastoral Letter Issued in Behalf of the Irish Hierarchy (Dublin: Veritas Publications, 1985), 42, art. 138.
43 Rodney Clapp, 106.
44 NCCB, Our Future Together (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1990), 17.
45 Robert G. DeMoss, Jr., Sex and the Single Person: Dealing Honestly with the Need for Intimacy (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), 26.
46 William Toohey, Life After Birth: Spirituality for College Students (New York: The Seabury Press, 1980), 115-116.
47 Carolyn A. Koons and Michael J. Anthony, Single Adult Passages: Uncharted Territories (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1991), 148.
48 Joseph A. Selling, “Homosexuality and Chastity: an Alternative Moral Criterion,” New Theology Review 11:2 (May 1998), 69.
49 NCCB, Faithful to Each Other Forever: a Catholic Handbook of Pastoral Help for Marriage Preparation (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1989), 71.
50 David A. Scott, “Living Together: Education for Marriage?” the Journal of Pastoral Counseling 18:1 (Spring/Summer 1983), 48.
51 J. Francis Stafford, “New Norms for Marriage in Denver,” Origins 19:40 (March 8, 1990), 660.
52 Ana Rodríguez Soto, “Living Together Before Marriage,” the Florida Catholic: Palm Beach Diocese 59:6 (December 11, 1997), 16.
53 Robert L. Randall, “What to Say After They Say, ‘We’re Living Together’?: Suggestions for Beginning Pastoral Counseling,” the Journal of Pastoral Care 33:1 (March 1979), 52.
54 NCCB, Faithful to Each Other Forever, 72-73.
55 William G. Axinn and Jennifer S. Barber, “Living Arrangements and Family Formation Attitudes in Early Adulthood,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 59:3 (August 1997), 605, 607.
56 Lynn Magdol, et al, “Hitting without a License: Testing Explanations for Differences in Partner Abuse Between Young Adult Daters and Cohabitors,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 60:4 (February 1998), 41.
57 James Healy, Living Together and the Christian Commitment (Allen, TX: Tabor Publishing, 1993) : 7-8, Couples’ Guide.
58 James Healy, Side one of accompanying cassette.
59 David A. Scott, 51.
60 Michael Pfeiffer, “Couples Living Together Before Marriage,” Origins 27:4 (June 12, 1997), 51.
61 Michael P. Orsi, “Pastoral Issues in Cohabitation,” Homiletic and Pastoral Review 98:2 (November 1997), 31.
62 Ana Rodríguez Soto, “Living Together Makes Divorce More Likely,” the Florida Catholic: Palm Beach Diocese 59:6 (December 11, 1997), 16; see also John R. Kahn and Kathryn A. London, “Premarital Sex and the Risk of Divorce,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 53:4 (November 1991), 845.
63 John R. Kahn and Kathryn A. London, 846.
64 Joseph Fiorenza, “Cohabiting Couples Who Seek Church Marriage,” Origins 17:24 (November 26, 1987), 432.
65 Michael Pfeiffer, 51.
66 “Policy Expects Engaged Couples to Practice Faith and not Cohabit,” National Catholic Register 74:37 (September 13-19, 1998), 3.
67 Michael Pfeiffer, 52.
68 James Healy, 4, Leader’s Guide.
69 “Policy Expects Engaged Couples to Practice Faith and not Cohabit,” 3.
70 Pontifical Council for the Family, “Preparation for the Sacrament of Marriage,” May 13, 1996, in Church Documents: Conciliar and Post Conciliar, 4th edition (Boston: Pauline Software, 1997), art. 37, CD-ROM.
71 Cardinal Bevilacqua, “Life Partners Legislation Opposed,” Origins 28:1 (May 21, 1998), 7.
72 “No to Benefits for Unmarried Couples,” Catalyst 25:5 (June 1998), 6.
73 Mike Mastromatteo, “Homosexual Rights Protected Under Canadian Province’s Code,” National Catholic Register 74:37 (September 13-19, 1998), 16.
74 Peter Riga in a speech delivered at the International Humanae Vitae Conference, “From Dissent to Acceptance: Realizing the Full Riches of Humanae Vitae,” 1993, side two of cassette.
75 Albert Y. Hsu, 20.
76 John Paul II, Pastores Dabo Vobis, March 25, 1992 (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1992), 20, art. 8.

Mr. Arthur G. Quinn is Director of Library and Information Services at St. Vincent de Paul Regional Seminary in Boynton Beach, Florida. He has graduate degrees in theology as well as library science. This is his first article in HPR.

Back to Catholic Information Center On Internet's
Main Periodical Page

Back to Homiletic & Pastoral Review - May 1999 - Table of Contents

Back to Homiletic & Pastoral Review Index