LETTERS

ARTICLES

NEWS

FOLLOW ME

ROAMIN' CATHOLIC






Contents © 1998
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.

LETTERS
SEPTEMBER 1998

---

A JESUITICAL VIEW OF TOLERANCE

It is entirely without surprise that the Jesuits at the University of San Francisco got rid of Father Cornelius Buckley, branding him too divisive to tolerate [see "Exile", July/August]. Not even for the sake of "diversity" can this modern Jesuit university tolerate someone so different that he shows by his every behavior what those Jesuits once were, what a Catholic university used to be.

What puzzles me though is why the behavior of some of the other Jesuits at USF is not considered divisive. There was never a word of Jesuit dissent, for example, when the powerful and well-connected University of San Francisco president, Father John Schlegel, S.J. became the chief witness for and testified in his priestly garb in favor of the appointment to the California Supreme Court of his friend, abortion rights supporter Ming Chin. After Father Schlegel's successful support, Justice Chin became immediately instrumental in forming the new Supreme Court majority necessary to invalidate the law requiring parental consent before abortionists practice their trade on underage girls. For his achievements, Justice Chin has received USF's prestigious Saint Thomas More award.

Divisiveness can arise from creating divisions or by candidly pointing out those really created by others. But, by whatever means we are given to see them, when divisions come into sharp view, it becomes possible to know on which side people and institutions really stand.

Edmond Francis McGill
Novato


TO CONTEND FOR THE FAITH

I am very impressed with your emphasis on Catholic apologetics and evangelization.

In an era when many Catholic periodicals are in the hands of timid conformists or heterodox subversives, the San Francisco Faith remains fearless and unequivocal in orthodoxy. It is obvious from my reading of previous issues that the San Francisco Faith has this as its goal: faithful adherence to the teaching of the Catholic Church. Issue after issue, the lay Catholic newspaper clarifies debates, states the teachings of the magisterium, and proposes practical actions for daily living.

In a time when many Catholics, often through no fault of their own, are confused about the teaching of the Church on faith and morals, the San Francisco Faith performs a valuable service by presenting the Church's doctrine with clarity. Your staff is to be commended for its loyalty to the successor of Peter and for its fidelity to the letter and authentic spirit of the Second Vatican Council.

I was particularly pleased to see the advertisements for Catholic educational institutions such as Thomas Aquinas College; The Catholic Distance University in Hamilton, Va, and Allentown College of St. Francis de Sales. Through your discernment in advertising, you do much service to your readers by directing them to teaching that faithfully adheres to Catholic orthodoxy. In so doing, you will enable Catholics to become fully equipped Christians who can "earnestly contend for the faith, once and for all delivered to the Saints."(St. Jude 1:3)

Steven McCoy


GOD SIGNED HIS CREATION

We are defending the Church on two fronts. We can't afford to be so preoccupied with the home front that we ignore attacks from without.

The National Academy of Science has just published a book called "Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science." Its purpose is to enlist and train teachers to build a wall of separation between science and religion. In simple terms their argument says: Evolution is science as long as it is not theistic evolution. Any intimation of design or purpose in the universe is off limits.

This is like making science a mystery story, wherein we never learn whodunit, or what the motive was, or even that the whole thing wasn't just an accident.

God signed his creation very plainly, but there is no argument on the definition of science, and therefore no criterion for what is science and what is not.

But can't the judgment of the National Academy of Science be trusted? They are the experts, aren't they? They are the same "experts" who, at the time of the congressional hearings on the Human Life Amendment, came forth with the bald-faced lie: Nobody knows when life begins. They can only be trusted to put ideology first and truth second.

Edward Freiling
Dublin

TOP