Marital and societal breakdown
A letter to the editor never repairs the damage done by a bad article, but the task is practically impossible when one tries to take on a piece as sarcastic and as full of misinformation as was Kathleen Howley's recent attack on annulments (Last Word, October 1997).
Where does one start to correct a writer who, for example, botches (three times when I stopped counting) such fundamental concepts as the difference between valid marriages and sacramental ones? And since when are we supposed to believe that ABC News knows anything about picking responsible, articulate priests to present Church teaching on any topic, let alone on annulments?
Let me, though, focus on one thing that Howley did get right: "Just about anyone can walk down the aisle of a church and exchange wedding vows." Would that she had spent just 30 seconds reflecting on the enormous implications of that fact.
The people walking down the aisle these days have been inundated by--take your pick--no-fault divorce and serially broken homes, abortion on demand, a completely contraceptive mentality, pandemic drug cultures, and the abandonment of sexual restraints. What Howley dismisses as "common fodder" in tribunals is, in reality, the grim harvest of 40 years of unbroken social disintegration.
Even among Catholics, only marginally less susceptible to this myriad of assaults on marriage than are the unprecedented numbers of non-Catholics filing annulment cases, the virtual disappearance of anything like accurate and effective marriage catechesis and the extremely limited authority of pastors and bishops to prevent disasters-waiting-to-happen from walking down the aisle has left tribunals with a thankless task so easy to ridicule, namely, sorting through the rubble of wrecked marriage and trying to !
figure out what went wrong.
Neither canon law nor Church teaching allows tribunals to declare marriages null based solely on the background of the parties, however relevant such factors are in hearing cases. But as my six children reach the age for marriage, I'll encourage them to ask Howley's questions: Is your intended spouse from a broken home or the victim of abuse, is there active alcoholism in the family, and so on. Only I'll ask such questions because I love my kids and appreciate the grave hardships that such conditions routinely work on marriage, quite aside from their implications in annulment cases. I certainly will not pose them as straw men out to score rhetorical points.
Dr. Edward N. Peters
Tribunal, Diocese of San Diego, California
Insofar as Dr. Peters is arguing for more rigorous marriage-preparation programs, we can wholeheartedly agree. But insofar as he suggests that a high proportion of the couples being married in Catholic churches have not been adequately prepared, we would respond that something is radically wrong--not just with society, but with the pastoral approach to marriage. (Notice that while the social conditions which undermine marriages are also prevalent in Western Europe, annulments are much less common there.)
It seems a bit unfair to chastise Kathleen Howley for ignoring the distinction between valid and sacramental marriages. Last Word is intended to provide a light-hearted treatment of an issue, and while canonists may recognize a crucial distinction between those terms, we doubt that many CWR readers were misled by her column.
Or perhaps we should make a more general request, to all our readers: Please do not take Last Word too seriously. In the past month we have received two angry letters, asking for an explanation of why baseball's designated-hitter rule is immoral (Last Word, August/September 1997), and two requests for the fictitious liturgical guidelines published by the equally fictitious Group for Liturgical Art and Dance (July 1997). Honest; sometimes we're only kidding! -- The Editor
Kudos for Caldecott
Bravo! What a delight it was to read Léonie Caldecott's articles about St. Thèrése (Second Spring, October 1997). "A doctor for a woman in need" and "The doctor we need" (the well chosen subtitles) captured the spirit of hope and happiness which the saint offers to each person, individually, and to all of us who are blessed to be members of the Body of Christ. I can almost smell the roses.
George A. Morton
Editor, The Parish Visitor
Monroe, New York
Reservations on Diana
As much as I enjoyed Léonie Caldecott's essays on St. Thèrése of Lisieux in general, I have to confess some serious misgiving about her introductory piece, "The Story of Another Soul." After the death of Princess Diana, an admitted tragedy, we were subjected to the din of thousands of voices calling for her instant canonization. It seems to me that the true Catholic sentiment on this occasion would have been horror that she apparently died when she was unprepared.
I say "apparently" because I do not know the state of her soul. Still the objective truth is that she was engaged in an extra-marital affair, which by her own admission was not the first of its kind. She may have done a lot of good while she lived, and she may have made her peace with God before she died. But it is an understatement to say that we don't know that. Prayers for her soul would be much more appropriate than the adulation we heard, even from the pulpits of our own Catholic parishes.
I know that Léonie Caldecott did not fall headlong into this emotional trap. Instead of saying that Princess Diana had soared straight up to heaven on her own merits, she hoped that Mother Teresa would carry her there--the way Mother Teresa carried so many other cripples in her earthly life. I only wish that she had made the point more forcefully, emphasizing that Diana's pitiful life could only be straightened out--and perhaps in the end it was; we just don't know--by the influence of someone like the saintly nun.
One television commentator remarked that in the space of one long week, the richest woman in the world and the poorest woman in the world had both died--only we might be confused which was which. I think he had it right.
Edward F. Carmichael
Champaign, Illinois
Democratic Party at prayer
As always, I read your wonderful magazine cover to cover as soon as it arrives. This time (August/September 1997) it was interesting to read Father Fred Kammer's letter "On Catholic Charities." Clearly he was pushing the Democratic Party's and the government's line with strict separation of church and state: "Our faith compels us to follow Jesus' example by helping poor and vulnerable people, not forcing our religion upon them as the price of such service."
The point is not that we should "force our religion upon them as the price of such service." The point is that we also have a divine command clearly stated in Matthew 28:19 as well as in Johns' Gospel 14:6 and the new Catechism (905) (and as so beautifully described in the essay section of the same August/September 1997 issue), to teach people of our religion, especially since it is a part of our charitable deeds toward others to show them that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, and no one goes to the Father except through him. If we love our neighbors, it is our duty to do everything we can to help them to go to heaven.
The "backing of the US bishops" is fairly meaningless. Although welcome changes in several dioceses are occurring, the US bishops had backed either openly or silently everything that the National Democratic Party promotes.
John J. Alpar
Amarillo, Texas
Corrections on Bl. Edith Stein
Readers of CWR can rightly thank Kathleen Howley for "The Miracle Child" (Profile, August/September 1997). Here we have a clear and moving account of the miraculous cure of young Benedicta McCarthy through the intercession of Blessed Edith Stein. The acceptance of this miracle by the Congregation for the Causes of Saints has brought to a successful close the process for raising Edith Stein to the ranks of the saints.
However, some corrections should be made in the account of the life of Edith Stein. First, Edith's sister Rosa, who was executed with her, never became a Carmelite nun. Rosa was baptized on Christmas Eve of 936 in Cologne near Edith's convent. When the Nazi persecution of Jews was accelerated, in December 1938, Edith arranged to be moved to the Carmelite convent in Echt, Holland, to free the nuns of Cologne of any anxiety. Rosa eventually reached Echt in the summer of 1940. The Carmelites welcomed Rosa, allowing her to live in their compound, but she was not allowed to enter the monastic community.
When the author speaks of "two young Carmelites" being sent off to the gas chambers of Auschwitz, we might be reminded that the ages of Edith and Rosa at the time of their death were 51 and 59 respectively.
Rev. John J. Fallon
Boston, Massachusetts