| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Letters
Bias and distortion
I have just now read my first Catholic World Report, and feel confident it will be my last. James Hitchcock's "Cardinal Bernardin's Legacy" (February 1997) was deeply disappointing in that it demonstrated how similar the author is to another of my least favorite writers, Father Andrew Greeley. While mentioning those names in the same breath may seem odd, it is clear that they both use like methods to make their respective points: half- truths, innuendo, bias in the extreme, distortion, and guilt by association.
As a priest of Chicago, I feel blessed to have known Cardinal Bernardin as a man who lived by the Gospel and fidelity to the Church. The fact that he could talk with people who held opposing views is a sharp contradistinction to Cardinals Law, Hickey, and O'Connor, whose violent and ungentlemanly public criticism of the Common Ground project was unwarranted (and considering that Cardinal Mahoney and Archbishop Lipscomb are a part of the Project but unscathed makes the attack appear all the more personal).
Cardinal Joseph Bernardin was more than the creature of Hitchcock's imagination portrayed in the article. Perhaps Catholic World Report would do well to publish some of the cardinal's actual words, such as his excellent address at Georgetown on protection of life, delivered the day he received the Medal of Freedom; or the real, full Common Ground Project statement and his follow-up releases; or, best of all, his book, The Gift of Peace.
I guess that my reading experience of Catholic World Report proves once again that a nice layout and a slick presentation does not make a magazine. And I do hope that as a history professor, James Hitchcock offers his students a more honest view of great people who have now passed into history.
Rev. Paul G. Seaman
Country Club Hills, Illinois
It is difficult to respond to your charges, since you offer no example of a point on which you believe James Hitchcock missed the mark. But if the criticisms of the Common Ground project expressed by his fellow cardinals were "violent and ungentlemanly," perhaps the point is that you will not allow any criticism at all. Most of the letters that follow suggest a very different attitude, more in keeping with our author's appraisal.- The Editor
Enough damage
When Cardinal Bernardin died I remarked to my husband that God thought Cardinal Bernardin had done enough damage and it was time to call him home. Your February issue's "Cardinal Bernardin's Legacy" certainly reinforced my views. For years my Catholic sharing group has puzzled over "What happened to our beautiful Catholic religion?" and now we know.
Thank you for telling it like it is.
Eilene Wetzel
Columbus, Georgia
A valuable insight
In re: "Cardinal Bernardin's Legacy"--our deep gratitude to historian James Hitchcock for unmasking the Trojan Horse in the American Catholic Church.
You render a very valuable service. May God continue to bless you.
Rev. Francis J. Lescoe
New Britain, Connecticut
Not a dissenter
In your February 1997 magazine, I read James Hitchcock's column, assuming that it would concentrate on Bernardin's concern over assisted suicide. Instead I read an article that I feel is entirely misleading and in many instances unjust.
Though Hitchcock attempts to sway his readers to believe that Bernardin endorsed dissent, I see it differently. I feel that the dissenting groups took Bernardin as one of their own, not because Bernardin shared their views, but because he was a member of the hierarchy that was willing to listen to them. It is unfortunate that so many dissenting religious, such as Father Andrew Greeley, would exploit someone as kind-hearted as Cardinal Bernardin and attempt to use him to their advantage. Bernardin does not belong to the dissenting Catholics as they would like us to believe, but he was entirely God's, which is a truth that the dissenters are incapable of understanding.
I think that Cardinal Bernardin was merely trying to love everyone despite their sins. After all, Jesus was often criticized for his compassion with the tax collectors and prostitutes. Perhaps Bernardin, a very humble man, did not assume his presence was an endorsement of dissenting views, but a way to keep peace.
In my opinion, anyone who cares so much about our welfare in regards to assisted suicide as he lay close to his own death, has achieved a level of selfless love that is common, indeed required of those we call saints.
Valerie Terzi
Manhattan Kansas
As Cardinal Law pointed out, the key flaw in the Common Ground project which Cardinal Bernardin launched is not that it embraces dissent, but that it reinforces the already widespread belief that the truths of the faith may be subject to discussion, debate, and revision. The proper role of a bishop, as teacher, is to instruct his flock in the truth--including the truth that Church doctrines are unchanging. - The Editor.
Polite toward dissent
"Cardinal Bernardin's Legacy" was sorely needed. One of the greater scandals in the Church is the politely correct approach to dissenters and heretics, which forgets that Christ tells us to treat them as Gentiles and tax collectors.
Blessed Josemaria Escriva has it right: "To serve as a loudspeaker for the enemy is the height of idiocy. And if the enemy is an enemy of God, it's a great sin." (The Way, 836).
Victor J. Dirse
Perrine, Florida
A frightening conclusion
One had given up hope of reading top-flight journalism form the US in recent years... but your contributor's exhaustive and frightening piece on the late Cardinal Bernardin will take some excelling. Strange, though, that he balked ultimately at the very obvious conclusion to be drawn--that the cardinal's life's work was the devil's work.
Tony Lilley
Tankerton, Kent
England
Milton's prayer
In your February issue, when describing "Cardinal Bernardin's Legacy," Professor Hitchcock paints a dismal picture of the efforts, witting or unwitting, of some American bishops to weaken the Catholic Church in America. If this picture is accurate, as it seems to be, there is nothing left us but to recite the prayer composed by Milton:
...one Tri-personal Godhead! Look upon this thy poor and almost spent, and expiring Church, leave her not thus a prey to those importunate wolves, that wait and think long till they devour thy tender flock, these wild boars that have broke into they vineyard, and left the print of their polluting hoofs on the souls of thy servants. O let them not bring about their damned designs that stand now at the entrance of the bottomless pit expecting the watchword to open and let out those dreadful locusts and scorpions, to reinvolve us in that pitchy cloud of infernal darkness, where we shall never more see the Sun of thy Truth again, never hope for the cheerful dawn, never more hear the bird of morning sing (Of Reformation Touching Church Discipline in England).
José Pereira
Bronx, New York
Good men driven away
CWR is always excellent. But the February 1997 issue is exceptional. Thanks especially for the article on anti-pope Bernardin and for the essay by Lesley Payne ("Salt in Their Wounds") on how good priests and seminarians are driven away while "rejects" of humanity are set loose on our people. No wonder the parishes are decimated as the "church that lied" continues to be about its predator bishops and priests! No wonder so many fine young men I know left the seminaries describing sinners of filthy behavior. I could not, but now do, believe them.
Dr. David G. Kennedy
Tucson, Arizona
Too negative
I have been pleased for the most part with the articles which appear in Catholic World Report. However, I must admit that the final two articles in the February edition, "Cardinal Bernardin's Legacy" and "Salt for Their Wounds" were a great disappointment. These articles were much more negative than I expect to see in a national Catholic journal that claims to uphold Christian ideals.
While Cardinal Bernardin may have been non-confrontational and sympathetic to those who dissent from Catholic teachings, a more rounded article should have been and could have been written. This prince of the Church may not be the saint that some people hold him up to be, but I do not find that he is only the culprit that Hitchcock paints him to be. Although I have personally experienced some of the more negative aspects of dissent within the Chicago archdiocese, I also know that there are many good Catholics there who, although not thrilled with everything Cardinal Bernardin has done, would have trouble agreeing with such a negative assessment which fails to acknowledge the good works that this man has done.
Lesley Payne's article is equally negative, and fails to hold the leaders of the local magisterium in the dignity they deserve. While the cases mentioned in Payne's article are most unfortunate, much of the story is missing because only one side is given in most cases. The article does not consider or look for successfully treated patients. I have written confirmation that my own bishop has read the article and finds also that the article is very one-sided. He is well acquainted with Dr. Fitzgibbons and his work, and he takes great care in keeping up with all of his priests who are sent for treatment. Having psychiatrists and psychologists who agree with the doctrine and teachings of the Catholic Church is very important. The National Conference of Catholic Bishops is also aware of this, and the bishops have discussed the issue.
Unfortunately, mental health is a field in which there is a great deal of disagreement among the professionals who work in it. Some follow one frame of treatment while another might approach the case very differently. There are numerous professionals in the field who have voiced their criticism of the problem of inadequate treatment within the field. Part of the problem is that most psychologists and psychiatrists have success with some types of mental illness and do not do as well with others. Part of this also has to do with the great demands that being really committed to the specific needs of the patient can place on a doctor, when so many other patients' needs must also be met. There are unfortunately even those who abuse their positions and take advantage of vulnerable people. Robert Coles in his book, The Mind's Fate, has mentioned that many lay people are guilty of giving too much importance to the advice of a psychological journal, and these people my even act against their own better judgment to follow the advice that they read in a book rather than to respond to the needs of the individuals they are dealing with. This is very much true in modern parenting and in self-motivation techniques.
I hope to enjoy forthcoming issues more than this one. It is very important that Catholic journals not follow their secular counterparts in printing articles which might be misleading because they are overly one-sided in scope and meet a certain agenda while compromising the genuine Catholic understanding of being fair toward our fellow Christians by showing them the dignity they deserve.
Michael P. LaFata
Reading, Pennsylvania
Your desire to avoid negative stories is easy to understand. What is a bit more difficult to understand, however, is your complaint against Lesley Payne's essay. The problem which she exposed was not merely the failure of clinical treatment, but the fundamental thrust of the treatment in centers serving troubled priests. We could easily understand failure, since (as, again, you point out) psychology and psychiatry are imperfect sciences. But the Payne essay illustrates the more frightening fact that several busy clinical centers are run by the light of philosophies which seem clearly at odds with the teachings of the Catholic Church. This, by the logic of your letter, is cause for grave concern. It is also, we believe, a problem which desperately needs to be understood; thus our decision to publish the essay.- The Editor
Room for change in the liturgy
Diogenes--I agree with you in principle (I refer to your criticism of priests who change Mass texts--or Bible texts). Nevertheless, I feel you used overkill in your words ("a priest who displayed such contempt...").
The Church "changed words" in Bibles (NAB, Jerusalem) which are approved for Mass use. Also the word "men" (as in "all men" was changed to "all"), was changed in the Consecration of the Mass. I think there is room for such changes--not for any reducing the Trinity to abstract words such as "creator" for the Father nor for changing the text of the Mass or improvising.
I was vicar for clergy for 19 years and most priests--even those involved in messing with authoritative texts or with matters of faith and morals--are hard-working and dedicated. I agree with you that no priest should change the liturgical text as in "The Lord be with you" to "The Lord is with you." I guess respect and reverence for the priesthood is my concern.
Msgr. Edward F. Healey
Columbus, Ohio
Yes, the Church has changed words, and changed translations, in liturgical texts. But as Diogenes would point out, these changes were made by the Church as a body, through an authoritative process. Many of us would like to make changes in the language of the liturgy, but refraining from doing so on our own, out of respect for the authority of the Church. When a priest unilaterally makes his own changes, he undermines the authority of the Church--and thus, indirectly, of the priesthood. - The Editor
The Episcopalian lesson
Thank you for your incisive survey ("A Principle Rejected," March 1997) and your report on the language results. My wife and I look forward to your interpretation of other aspects of the survey.
As a retired professor of linguistics who has been writing scholarly pieces on theo-linguistics for many years, let me warn you not to hope for much understanding of the language pitfalls of liturgical revision.
As a former Episcopalian priest, let me report that this is the same issue that began the slide to heresy and ruin for the Anglican communion. Similar survey results were published throughout the Episcopalian Church of the US in the 1960s and 1970s, but they had absolutely no effect on the bishops' liberal actions.
As a pragmatist, therefore, let me strongly suggest that the cracked door of misconceived language changes be slammed shut and that the first step should be to send copies galore of your language survey results to Rome.
Donald D. Hook
Milton, Delaware
Plus ça change...
St. Gregory of Tours, in his History of the Franks, gives a short account of the Council of Mâcon in Gaul which he attended as bishop of Tours in AD 586. The following is an excerpt:
There came forward at this council a certain bishop who maintained that woman could not be included in the term "man." However, he accepted the reasoning of the other bishops and did not press his case, for the Holy Book of the Old Testament tells us that in the beginning, when God created man, "Male and female created he them, and called their name Adam," which means earthly man; even so He called the woman Eve, yet of both He used the word "man."
Similarly our Lord Jesus Christ is called the Son of man, although He was the son of the Virgin, that is to say of a woman. When He was about to change the water into wine, He said to her: "Woman, what have I to do with thee?" and so on. They supported their argument with many other references, and he said no more.
Lawrence Tarleton
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Zero priority
Your article on inclusive language is one of penetrating analysis and courage. It is almost tragic to see our shepherds so far out of touch with the real issues threatening our daily lives.
To the rank-and-file Catholic, inclusive language is of zero priority. Moreover, if enacted, it will become one further step into the pit of dilution and confusion of our faith. It is my guess that most of us will dust off our old and trustworthy missals and hide our faces in embarrassment when our priests try femspeak.
What the laity needs are crystal clear directives repeating the fundamentals of Christ's teaching. Such as: abortion is murder, fornication is a mortal sin, the (profitable) practice of rendering false witness is a grave sin against charity.
What happened to Christian wisdom? In the election of a patently immoral and untrustworthy president, primarily through the Catholic swing vote, our shepherds instead of giving guidance, were hiding behind tax rules. Our government, Supreme Court, and even Congress, in violation of our Constitution, interfere almost daily in our religious freedom. Here lie our priorities! It is indeed perplexing that our bishops seem so often deaf or insensitive to the rightful claim of pastoral care of the silent majority.
Wendell E. Rossman
Phoenix, Arizona
Be consistent
These ICEL people have got to stop discriminating and get to work on the Hail Mary. "Blessed are you among men and women..." And they should start petitioning Rome to allow men to become nuns. How else do they expect to be taken seriously?
Carol Suhr
Santa Fe, New Mexico