| March 10, 2008 | Volume 83, Number 10 | |
|
|
Engineer defends fluorescent light bulbsI have been an electrical engineer for over 25 years and have worked extensively in lighting design. In all of these years, I have never heard so much misinformation and nonsense as I have about compact fluorescent lamps. Fluorescent lighting has been in use since the 1940s. Since that time, it has supplanted incandescent lighting as the primary source of office lighting. This is due to its long life, high efficiency and ease of operation. If you are working in an office, you just need to look up at the ceiling. Those 2’ X 4’ light fixtures above you are fluorescent light fixtures. Compact fluorescent lamps are a recent offshoot of fluorescent lighting. They use similar technology and have the same characteristics. The equivalent compact fluorescent lamp will cost about 10 times as much as its equivalent incandescent, but it will last 10 times as long. The compact fluorescent lamp that is equivalent to a 60 watt incandescent lamp will produce the same amount of light but use only 13 watts of energy. All fluorescent lamps contain a small amount of mercury. That is how they work. The amount of mercury in a compact fluorescent lamp is no bigger that the tip of a pen and it is contained within the glass envelope. It will not be released into the atmosphere unless the glass envelope is broken. It is interesting to note that more mercury will be released into the atmosphere by coal burning power plants when such lamps are not used than by compact fluorescent lamps. The ideal way to dispose of used lamps would be to recycle them so that the mercury can be recovered. If there is no recycling program in your area, you can dispose of the lamps by sealing them in a plastic bag then sealing that bag in another plastic bag then placing them in the garbage. In short, compact fluorescent lamps are a safe efficient method of lighting based on a proven technology that has been in widespread use for over 60 years. I would highly recommend using them.
Marriage and divorce article unsettlingI recently read your (Catholic News Service) article “Bishops’ survey looks at U.S. Catholics’ practices, views on marriage” in The Catholic Virginian (Feb. 25 issue), and hoped it had been improperly edited before it was published. To my surprise, the sentence “...church teaching is accepting of divorce in cases of marital infidelity believed that those false statements were true church teachings” also appeared in the article on your web site. That article went on to represent that the Church would not even accept divorce in the case of physical or emotional abuse. This is an extremely insensitive and dangerous position for any Church publication to put into print. I would hope that my Church had learned from the clergy abuse scandals that Catholics, even ordained Catholics, are not immune to real abuse, and there are innocent victims of that abuse. It cannot afford to be pictured as encouraging or even looking away from any kind of abuse. That includes abuse within a family. Spousal abuse can and does occur. It is a fact of life. Those who are abused have enough trouble escaping from the abuser; they do not need to be told that their Church is either encouraging them to remain with the abuser or insinuating they are in some way sinful if they decide to leave and go through the pain of civil divorce. When a Catholic publication or web site allows a statement like this to appear, it can cause great pain for those who have already been victimized. The United States Catholic Catechism for Adults section on Divorce and Pastoral Care clearly recognizes that there are “times when divorce is the only possible recourse.” It further states that “the Church offers her support to those involved and encourages them to remain close to the Lord through frequent reception of the Sacraments” (page 287). On page 410 of the same publication, in the section on Threats to Marriage, it even recognizes that at times (like those referred to above) a separation can be “a prudent action to take.” It continues to say that a “civil divorce...can be tolerated and does not cause a moral offense.” I certainly think that implies that in its compassion “the Church is accepting of divorce” and supportive of those who have had to make the difficult decision to divorce.
(Msgr. Francis Muench, Judicial Vicar with the Diocesan Tribunal responds: Part of the debate centers around the word “accepting.” The U.S. Bishops’ Catechism, like the “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” does not see the word “accepting” as synonymous with “condoning,” the interpretation the writers appear to have taken. As the context of the catechisms reveal, the Church’s hope is that a couple whose marriage is troubled will seek every legitimate means to be reconciled with one another. If they cannot live in peace and, indeed, are living in such a way that their life together is working to their detriment, and that of their children (if any), a physical (and, if necessary, legal) separation can be considered (see Code of Canon Law, c.1153). The Church explicitly recognizes adultery as one circumstance in which that conjugal peace may not be able to be restored (Code of Canon Law, c. 1152). Finally, if that same peace can be achieved in no other way, the Church recognizes that a civil divorce may be the only means of establishing peace and protecting the rights of spouses and children to support and security. In the eyes of the Church, a civil divorce would be obtained only as a last resort when a couple’s relationship has irretrievably sundered. This is not the same thing as saying that the marriage has ended in the eyes of the Church, and I believe that was the point of the article. It means the Church recognizes that cohabitation is no longer possible for the couple. The Church still presumes that the consent exchanged at their wedding remains valid (Code of Canon Law, c. 1060). This is not changed by infidelity or by the presence of any other grave sin.) The CNS article did not appear in the web edition of The Catholic Virginian. |
It took a tremendous amount of courage for me to make that first call, but it was a call that changed my life. Through their compassion, faith and the power of the Holy Spirit working within me I was able to come out of that darkness into God’s loving forgiving arms.