The following letters to the editor appear in the edition of Oct. 9, 2003. Letters appearing in this space do not necessarily reflect the views of the Arlington Catholic Herald or the Catholic Diocese of Arlington. The editor reserves the right to edit letters as necessary. There is no guarantee of publication. Send letters to: letters@catholicherald.com.

Amendment Problem

There is a major flaw in the proposed Constitutional amendment to preserve the nature of marriage as that of a permanent union of one man and one woman. The wording of the amendment fails to protect the legal definition of marriage from being changed by treaties or other international protocols. Unless these additional prohibitions are included in the wording of the amendment, judicial precedents establishing treaties as the law of the land could lead to a quick nullification of any such amendment.

Fr. Thomas Collins
Richlands

Church Is Not for Talking

Shaw states that "one in three" Catholics attend Sunday Mass. It is my understanding that it is more like one in five.

I was at a program yesterday in a church with a very famous speaker. The din was like a gymnasium at a basketball game and any time there was any silence at all, a buzz would start. Even during Benediction, the couple behind me kept talking. The "audience" applauded for everything, and there were two standing ovations. These are the people who come to Mass. If the churchgoers don’t seem to have a clue that the "real presence" means the real presence of God, then what in heaven’s name would bring the non-churchgoers? The intellectuals can write or talk all they want about the Eucharist, but it will mean nothing. "Example is everything" and the example that we see in our churches is of a people that do not have a clue that the Church is a place of worship of Almighty God. Talking in church was and is a sin and when it leads others to copy you, it is a serious sin. Why do you never hear anyone say that?

Arline Saiki

A Vocation for All

Mary Beth Bonacci writes (ACH 10/2/03): "As far as Church teaching is concerned, [vocation to the single life] does not exist. ... Traditionally, ‘vocation’ has been understood to indicate a call from God — and a subsequent public vow — to completely give oneself and one’s life to someone (or Someone, as the case may be). ... [Single people], for whatever reason, haven’t settled into a vocation."
The Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Encyclopedia (copyright 1991, p. 962) has this entry for the word "Vocation": "In the Christian life, the divine calling to follow a certain course of action in life, especially with regard to the choice of a state in life (married, single or religious) is spoken of as a vocation. In practice, although the term has this broad meaning, it has come to refer in a special way to the call to the religious and/or priestly life. Hence, it is common to speak of a religious vocation, and also of the signs of a religious vocation. ... In its broadest meaning, the term refers to the universal call of God to all to a life of grace and union with Him. This is the great vocation, the call that gives human life its supernatural destiny and meaning."
Despite the common practice of dropping the adjective "religious" in asking for prayers for vocations and in titles to special ministries in this area, and thus the general sense that the word "vocation" refers only to a call to the religious and/or priestly life, every one, including single people who have not made public vows, does truly have a "vocation." To deny this is to deny that each one is called to a special role in God’s plan. Each Christian is called to make that one great commitment to fulfill God’s will as a functioning member of the Mystical Body of Christ. Nothing ever happens by accident, if one truly believes in Divine Providence. "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you," the Lord said (Jer 1:4-5).

Corazon M. Siddayao
Arlington

Political vs. Personal

Years ago, the sisters in Catholic school taught me that Jesus said, "Whatsoever YOU do to the least of my brothers, you do to Me." Reading Mr. Horejsi’s article "Mixing Politics and Religion" (ACH 10/2/03), it appears that Mr. Horejsi thinks Jesus meant to say "Whatsoever you get the politicians to force other people to do to the least of my brothers, you do to Me." I thought I had to personally and voluntarily help the poor and the vulnerable. I thought that God was going to judge me based on what I had done or not done. But Mr. Horejsi and the bishops he quotes lead me to believe that all I need to do is lobby the politicians to force my neighbors to give of their treasure, and the politicians will see that I go to heaven.

I’m not convinced. I would rather take my chances trying to follow the example of the Good Samaritan the sisters told me about. When a lawyer asked Jesus what he needed to do to get to heaven, Jesus told him the story of a Samaritan who personally and voluntarily helped a stranger who had been beaten and robbed and left at the roadside to die. Jesus knew He was talking to a lawyer, who may have had many political friends. Still He did not tell him a story about a Samaritan that lobbied the politicians of his day to make laws that forced the people who had passed by to take care of the stranger. Maybe Mr. Horejsi would say that Jesus meant to say that, but I think Jesus was pretty good at saying what He meant.

I pray that the Church and her bishops continue to focus on teaching and motivating people throughout the world to personally and voluntarily help those in need based on Christ’s teaching rather than soliciting the politicians to do the job for them through the force of more ill conceived government laws and programs.

Al Wavering
Winchester

Copyright ©2003 Arlington Catholic Herald.  All rights reserved.