Letters to the Editor
Catholicity on Campus
I want to thank you for the insert on truly Catholic universities and colleges (“Catholic College Survey ’05,” Sept. 25-Oct. 1).
What you did was quite brave in terms of the response you will likely engender from rabid alumni; I'm sure you realize this by now if you didn't when you produced it. But what you have done is extremely important. Your insert presented a standard for Catholic higher education (not different from canon law and Ex Corde Ecclesiae-). Hopefully this will become a basic minimum for Catholic schools in our country — and may those that do not measure up now begin to do so.
I have greatly resented for many years that I received an anti-Catholic education at the University of Notre Dame, and only recovered some years later. I don't believe the school has improved; rather, it has gotten worse.
My personal experience and that of my children easily confirms your presentation. One went to the University of Dallas, one to Gonzaga, and a third is now at Ave Maria University. Only the last would I consider a Catholic school; the difference is quite significant. My donations to higher education are limited to the schools on your list until the others reform. Until then, I will keep praying for them, but especially for the students.
JOHN KERIAN
Grafton, North Dakota
Catholic Schools
Thank you very much for the articles and reports on the Catholic schools that are making the effort to pass on the faith to their students.
The sad part is the few there are in numbers.Thank you for doing your part.
BOB DALTON
Parker, Colorado
As chair of the Department of Philosophy and Theology at the University of Saint Francis in Fort Wayne, Ind., I am intrigued with the college survey conducted by the Register. Do you plan on conducting the survey again any time soon?
I ask because our university is in the process of faithfully implementing Ex Corde Ecclesiae and I would like to be able to have USF included in your next survey. Of course, the final decision on whether or not to participate does not rest with me personally, but I am interested in whether or not it is even a possibility.
JOHN P. BEQUETTE
University of Saint Francis Fort Wayne, Indiana
Ms. Miers Means Well
Relevant to “The Changing Face of the U.S. Supreme Court” (Oct. 9-15):
Much has been written on and speculated about Harriet Miers, President Bush's nominee to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court. Many pro-lifers have expressed disappointment, while some pro-abortion senators have indicated support.
There is not enough information on Ms. Miers to confidently say that she will vote to correct Roe v. Wade. However, there are several indications that make us cautiously optimistic.
President Bush is without question pro-life. Nearly all of his court appointments to date have been excellent. Evidence is good that Chief Justice John Roberts will perform admirably on the Supreme Court. President Bush has earned a high level of trust and respect from the pro-life community. I believe his heart is with us on abortion.
Those who know Harriet Miers depict her as a devout evangelical Christian, active in her church. A person's religious beliefs are the foundation of his or her actions. Ms. Miers is obviously a strong person. She was the first woman president of a major law firm and the first woman president of the Texas State Bar. Thus her convictions, whatever they may be, are likely strong.
As president of the Texas Bar Association, Ms. Miers was the chief sponsor of a resolution to change the pro-abortion position of the American Bar Association to one of neutrality. While her efforts failed, she made an impressive attempt.
Pro-lifers painfully remember that pro-life Republican presidents nominated pro-abortion Justices O’Connor, Souter and Kennedy to the court. And since the Supreme Court is our most viable option to ending the modern-day holocaust of abortion, we can ill-afford another tragic mistake. Ultimately, we will only be certain of Ms. Miers’ legal position on abortion after she has been confirmed and rules on an abortion-related case.
In the final analysis, after reviewing all of the known facts, Life Issues Institute feels the odds of her opposing Roe are seemingly to our advantage. That is why we are cautiously optimistic she is the right pick for the court. Obviously, you will have to make up your own mind.
We will continue to closely monitor the situation and bring you important facts as they develop. Please continue to pray for President Bush, Harriet Miers, the Supreme Court and our nation. Please pray that God will end abortion in America.
BRADLEY MATTES
Executive Director
Life Issues Institute Cincinnati
It Takes 2
Relevant to “Knights Pledge to Take ‘Under God’ to High Court” (Sept. 25-Oct. 1):
As a beginning, we need a campaign to clarify the real issues of laws and crimes that are involved in the discussion of separation of church and state. We just throw out the words “church and state,” and few of us know what we are talking about.
First of all, we need to define the terms. Let us say that “church” means churches whose members believe in God and his moral laws, the Ten Commandments. The term “state” includes governments that are concerned with civil and criminal laws, which governments have passed to maintain order in our society for the good of the majority of our citizens.
Both organizations deal with most of the same subjects and have the same long-term goals. Actually, the churches should be the preparatory instruments to help the state laws function better. If the churches teach the moral laws, the state should have fewer crimes to prosecute.
We need to clarify the fact that criminal laws are based on moral laws. This is obvious from reading the Ten Commandments, which teach us not to kill, cheat, steal, bear false witness, commit adultery and more.
This is all spelled out in the commandments of God, and the state has passed laws against these crimes. As an example, one of our states has 200 crimes on its books, including rape, larceny, embezzlement, murder, voluntary manslaughter, criminal negligence, burglary, arson, perjury, kidnapping, assault and robbery.
So why would anyone want to dismantle the Ten Commandments and fail to support the churches that help us to maintain an orderly society? The excuse is seeking false, selfish freedom to do as we please ignoring the good of the majority.
Clarifying these issues might improve the understanding of the moral issues involved. Maybe we can improve both church and state.
DELPHINE MCCLELLAN
Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin
Establishing Freedom
Regarding “Knights Pledge to Take ‘Under God’ to High Court” (Sept. 25-Oct. 1):
The so called “establishment clause” is always only half-quoted. The first part is “Congress shall make no laws” and the second half of it is “nor deny the free exercise thereof.”
The judge is ruling against the Constitution by denying students the free exercise of their religion.
CECIL CORULLI
Chelan, Washington
Straight on La Salette
Regarding the letter to the editor titled “Here Comes the Havoc” (Oct. 2-8):
The writer says, “Our Lady of La Salette said that the seasons would be altered.”
As a missionary of Our Lady of La Salette for more than 50 years, I can assure you that there are no such words in the message Mary gave at La Salette on Sept. 19, 1846, the only (La Salette) message the Church ever accepted.
Everything that has been added to that message since then is mere speculation, if not invention or just plain fantasy.
FATHER LEO P. MAXFIELD, MS
Enfield, New Hampshire
