|
LETTERS
Question asked on ‘small loan lenders’
In your editorial in the CV of January 28, 2008 there was a sentence that reads: “There is pending legislation in the General Assembly which would put the rate cap at 36 percent, the same cap that applies to other small loan lenders.”
Questions: Who exactly are these ‘other small loan lenders?’
If these “small loan lenders” are already capped at 36 percent, why do not the poor go to these lenders instead?
Bernard Florey
Newport News
(Editor’s note: Jeff Caruso, executive director of the Virginia Catholic Conference, replies: “Other small loan lenders that must abide by the generally applicable 36 percent annual-percentage-rate (APR) cap include businesses like banks, credit unions, pawn shops and check cashers. In Virginia, at least 59 credit unions (394 branches) offer alternatives to payday lending.
“Increasing awareness of and access to such credit unions could help significantly reduce the number of families trapped by the cycle of debt that is so common with payday loans.”)
read the editorial »
Reader finds omission in March for Life article
I’ve just read the January 28 Catholic Virginian. I was pleased to see the lead picture of the Walsingham students that attended the March for Life in Washington D.C.
While the article discussed some of the elements of the march, I felt it fell short describing the magnitude of the event.
I joined a bus load of youth from St. Bede’s to attend the Youth Mass at the Verizon Center in Washington before the March and then proceeded to the National Mall to join with the crowds already forming.
Our Catholic youth and families filled the Verizon center! They estimated some 25,000 people for Mass. The Papal Nuncio attended the Mass and read a letter to the youth from the Pope.
Some 250 priests participated in the Mass, and the floor of the center was filled with enthusiastic seminarians.
To watch this procession and hear the words of consecration in an otherwise silent arena was truly awe-inspiring. After Mass, we walked to the Mall to join with those already there.
The estimates on this cold day were 200- to 300-thousand in attendance. The article noted the usual throngs, but failed to note the magnitude of the throngs.
I’ m not one who likes crowds and am not normally an activist for causes, but would encourage everyone who reads this article to plan to attend the March next year. We live close enough that this is a day trip and the cause is great.
The Center for Bio-ethical Reform estimates that, on average, another 3,700 abortions will occur in the United State again today; every day of the year. Our Catholic Virginian could do a whole review of churches participating in the March next year.
Jeffrey Plourde
Williamsburg
read the article »
Disabled need inclusion in church
I read Ms. Grignol’s article on parish advocates for the disabled in the January 14 issue of CV with considerable personal interest.
Our Catholic Church and our diocese in particular have made much progress in including laity, women, racial and ethnic minorities and young people among others in the active ministries of the church.
Sadly, the one area that is tragically neglected is the inclusion of the disabled. As a physically disabled person, I speak for myself and all my fellow disabled.
I do not want to be pitied nor catered to. I want to participate actively in any area or function of the church in which I am fully qualified.
The Rev. Mr. Duszinski’s observation that barriers “like attitude, communication or even how accessible our church is” weaken the Christian community for all of us. I can attest that all of these barriers and many more hinder my active participation and that of my fellow disabled in the communal life of the church.
By the grace of God, we have many gifts to offer. We do not want to be relegated to some obscure corner of the church.
We want to exercise those ministries of which we are totally capable. We look forward to the time when our gifts and talents can be employed to the benefit of the entire community.
Deacon Nicholas J. Marino
Prince of Peace
Chesapeake
read the article »
Use of crucifix questioned by some
I thought that you and your readers might be interested in an e-mail that I sent Fr. Dietzen in reference to his article on why Catholic churches have crucifixes and most Protestant ones do not. I enjoy reading The Catholic Virginian immensely and appreciate your coverage of our diocese and the Catholic Church as a whole very much. God bless you!
Dear Fr. Dietzen,
I am writing to add a little something to the column published in the January 28, 2008 issue dealing with the question regarding the usage of crucifixes in Catholic churches vs. crosses (without a corpus) in Protestant ones.
As a former priest of the American Episcopal Church (I was received into the Roman Catholic Church in 2004) who was raised and educated in the Episcopal faith (my Doctor of Ministry is from the School of Theology of The University of the South), I wanted to add to your final two paragraphs.
In the second to last paragraph you state “No one, to my knowledge, has satisfactorily explained why Protestant churches customarily use crosses without the body of the Lord.” Let me attempt to do just exactly that.
For many Protestant Christians, the matter of whether or not there should be a corpus on the cross is one of deeply held religious belief.
The second commandment (according to Protestant numbering) states: “Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the water under the earth; thou shalt not bow down to them, nor worship them.” (Book of Common Prayer, 1928 edition)
Many Protestants view this as an absolute prohibition against maintaining any sort of religious statuary, and most certainly kneeling or genuflecting before, or “venerating” any sort of religious statuary.
The Catholic practice of venerating the cross by kissing the feet of the corpus on Good Friday, or kneeling before a statue of Mary or another saint to pray for intercession would be considered wholly anathema.
Though not all Protestants are “Calvinists,” reading Chapter XI of Book I of John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion will serve to help any Catholic gain an understanding of how deeply held this belief can be and the theological bases for it.
This chapter provides Calvin’s arguments for rejecting images in worship and his belief that the use of any images leads to idolatry. In addition, the fact that many Protestant Christians in England at the time of Oliver Cromwell and the Commonwealth and Protectorate (1649–1702) took active part in destroying numerous religious statues contained in cathedrals and churches further serves to give one a sense of how strongly this current of belief can run within the Protestant ethos.
Most certainly there is a sense within modern and traditional Protestantism that the empty cross celebrates the resurrection and the risen Christ, but one should not underestimate the sense within Protestant Christianity that the use of religious statuary tends towards idolatry.
H. Graham Hudgins, D.Min.
Norfolk
Fr. Dietzen's article did not appear in the web edition of The Catholic Virginian
Solidarity needed in immigration debate
The article in your last issue “El cambio de corazones y de manera de hablar vistos como clave para el debate sobre la inmigración,” in Spanish, about the “change in heart” that is needed over the immigration debate, should really be published in English, given the terrible climate in Virginia nowadays.
The ones who set policy in our Commonwealth would disallow such a column if they have their way.
Right now, we are in the midst of a legislative session at the Virginia General Assembly. This year there are over 100 bills targeted at immigrants.
There are proposed bills that would require that English be the official language of the Commonwealth and disallow any material to be printed in any other language with few exceptions; that the cost for foreign language interpreters “ be borne by a defendant who is convicted at trial of the criminal offense”; that no provisions of bail be allowed for undocumented immigrants if they are convicted of a crime; that “an employee who is replaced by his employer with an unauthorized alien shall have a cause of action against his employer.”
There is also a bill that prevents organizations who receive state or local money, from using those funds in charity for undocumented individuals to provide the same “type of benefits or assistance” as food stamps (which under state law are prohibited from being used by the undocumented). This latter bill could feasibly put soup lines run by diocesan churches in jeopardy as breaking the law.
Yet, there is a groundswell of support from citizens for such tough actions against the undocumented in Virginia.
Many reading this letter will vehemently disagree with my opposition to any legislation designed to strangle the undocumented immigrant. Most of that disagreement is centered on an argument that undocumented immigrants deserve nothing from us. Documented ones, however, do.
I beg anyone to examine their own conscience and ask themselves, what side would Jesus of Nazareth take on this issue?
Would Jesus have taught us to choke the immigrant out of our Commonwealth with volumes of law to paralyze their ability to earn money to send back to their families living in poverty?
Would Jesus have preached the Gospel, but made exceptions to it, for those who are undocumented?
In unity with the Catholic bishops and our hierarchal Catholic Church, may all Catholics in the Diocese of Richmond stand as a community of believers in solidarity against such laws.
Jim Romeo
Chesapeake
read the article »
Private schools need support
Now that aid to private schools is being considered in some form by a number of legislatures it is appropriate to reflect on the true meaning of any aid represented by vouchers, text books, transportation, etc. with reference to private schools in Virginia.
In point of fact, aid to private schools is really aid to citizen-students, offspring of taxpaying citizen-parents. It is aid to help these students meet the requirements of education established by the State of Virginia, not by any private school board.
It is true that most of the private schools go beyond the requirements demanded for a diploma approved by the State, but they do not receive a penny in aid in support of their additional requirements. In fact, the total allotted per private citizen-student allowing for tuition plus State aid is much less than the per capita expenditure for public school students. This tuition comes from the pockets of citizen-parents who also pay the taxes that support public education.
State aid to private and parochial schools does not exist and never has. It is strictly aid to our citizens who are getting the education demanded by the State in accredited schools that provide the additional education demanded by their personal choice.
How petty can opponents of choice be? In pursuit of their personal educational goals, our private schools are simultaneously providing a state-required education for a huge segment of our citizens.
The State receives the benefit of having all of these citizens educated to its own standards at a cost (falsely referred to as aid to private schools) much lower than what it spends to educate citizens in a public school. The citizen-parents of our private schools, for their own ideals in our free society, are absorbing a tremendous expense to meet the standards of the state for its citizens.
Compelled by the noblest ideals, they freely assume a task and its cost which is for the State a legal obligation. Virginia’s Superintendent of Education gave $9,755 as the expenditure per public school student as updated March 30, 2007.
Our private schools are saving the State approximately $5,000 per year on average for each student they enroll. If they were to close, the State educational system would be even more strapped for funds than it is currently as the State would be required by law to absorb the cost of educating the flood of students exiting the private sector.
 Opponents of choice should be ashamed to deny aid to the citizen-students enrolled in private schools.
The sacrifices their tax-paying citizen-parents make to keep private schools open allow the public schools to be funded at their current levels.
There is an added consideration in all of this. Many of our public schools fail miserably in their mission to educate when compared with private schools.
One does not need testing to demonstrate this. The very existence of the private schools demonstrates it. Failing private schools get closed. Failing public schools get more money.
John Hanson
Bristol
back to top
Copyright © 2008 The Catholic Virginian Press. Articles from Catholic News Services, including Fr. Dietzen’s column, may not be reproduced due to copyright considerations.
The Catholic Virginian is a biweekly publication serving the people of the Catholic Diocese of Richmond. This website includes some, but not all, of the articles from the print version of The Catholic Virginian.
For subscription information Contact Us.
|
