Absolute Power

Edward Halpin's letter in the Nov. 3-9 Register contains an error regarding one of history's famous quotations. In his letter on Father Coughlin, Mr. Halpin quotes “Aeron” as the author of the words “power corrupts.” It may reflect my own ignorance but I find no reference to Mr. Aeron. I wondered whether or not that was a typo and that Mr. Halpin was really referring to Lord John Acton, a liberal Catholic in England who was opposed to papal infallibility and expressed it thus: “Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

John Vitello

Covina, California

Editor's note: Indeed, it was a typo.

Nonprofit Tax Amendment

The proposed nonprofit tax amendment on the recent Colorado ballot (“Colorado's Nonprofit Tax Plan Would Drain Church,” Nov. 3-9), would have forced churches, charities and non-profit organizations to pay their “fair share” of taxes as a “social duty.”

Three years ago, I wrote in The Tablet (Brooklyn, N.Y.) about the death penalty. My hypothesis at the time was that for 2000 years the Church has condoned the execution of murderers, that the Catechism of the Catholic Church also condones it, and that it takes $60-70,000, depending on the state, to subsidize and support one prisoner for one year in prison for life. Who was going to pay for this?

The answer to that question was silence and mass indifference to the plight of the taxpayer, with the attitude that as long as the bishops were held exempt, the other guy could be burdened with the payments.

We heard again and again the socio-moral pronouncements of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops on such issues as allowing and subsidizing illegal immigration etc., and suggesting more socioeconomic giveaways at taxpayers'expense.

Now the bishops, and Protestant clergy of like persuasion, have opened the door to where they will be forced to put their money where their mouth is.

However, this nonprofit tax amendment is a twoway street! Taxation without representation is tyranny, we are told! If churches are not exempt from taxation then they should have the civil right to speak out from the pulpits, without the deterrent of separation of Church and state.

This amendment would also make both Catholics and Protestant bishops more cautious in their pronouncements that would involve taxation.

Joseph Dalton

Downsville, N.Y.

Editor's note: The Colorado tax measure was defeated.

Young Adults Want Substance

In October of last year, I joined the Young Adult Fellowship of Holy Family parish in Glendale, Calif. I met the woman who would become my wife in that group, and last April, I was asked to direct the group (along with one other member). When I assumed the leadership position, our numbers were declining, and the average weekly attendance was about six or seven people. Since then, membership has increased dramatically. We now have about 12 or 13 people who come on a regular basis, others who come semi-regularly, and one or two new people each week. As I write—no joke—the phone just rang from another interested person. Whether you'd call it the action of the Holy Spirit, or the result of our recent aggressive, “high profile” activities in the parish (or both), no one can deny that ours is a very successful—though still modest—young adult fellowship. So I feel justified to offer some comment on the article in your Nov. 16 issue, “At Long Last, Young Adults get Serious Attention.”

Father Charles Hagan seems to hold the view that young adults are “turned off” by solid doctrine, and the answer is to “soft-pedal” the rules and to “hit these people with a series of things they need to get married—birth certificates, workshops. …” With all due respect, I think Father Hagan is wrong. You do not serve young Catholics seeking guidance in their faith by jettisoning the “why” and focusing exclusively on the “how,” especially with regards to sexuality and the sacrament of matrimony. Should a pastor say to every starry-eyed couple who comes through the rectory door, “Yes, come in, here's how you get married…”? Any good pastor will answer that question with “No.” The Bride of Christ should not be made into a “marriage factory” for all who apply, including those couples who have no intention of taking their faith seriously, or they will be seeking annulments or divorces later. It's much better to turn some people off than to deny all of them the true doctrine and solid Church teaching they will need to really follow Christ, persevere in marriage, and uphold their Catholic faith in a culture that subverts it in so many ways.

I will not deny that some people are turned off by sound doctrine; Jesus, too, lost some people with some strong statements. But what the critics usually bypass is the fact that there is a lot of traffic in both directions. Solid doctrine, well presented, attracts most people, especially among young adults; “nice Catholicism” may draw some in the door, but they won't retain their respect for leaders who are anxious to avoid offending anyone. It's those who fear offending young people who are losing their allegiance. (Do you know that the largest number of converts to evangelical Protestant, i.e. “Bible Christian” sects are former Catholics?) Even people I've known who live together before marriage have respect for those who lovingly tell them that what they're doing is wrong. Our Young Adult Fellowship continues to flourish, not because we try to please everyone, but because we present the Catholic faith in all its beauty and integrity.

Larry Carstens

North Hollywood, California