Actions, not scenarios

Why is it that some people fear the unknown, but don’t fear what they know? A case in point is Tom Tracy’s “Pro-lifers fear ‘hard-core, pro-abortion forces’ in the Biden Administration” in the Nov. 19 Catholic Spirit. Tracy spends paragraph after paragraph quoting Mark Harrington and Tom McClusky with their “anticipates that,” “expected that” and “will likely” scenarios of fearful things that Biden might do, and fails to mention at all the sinful things that Trump did do: his characterization of immigrants as “criminals,” his disparaging of refugees, calling what they’ve done in Minnesota “absolutely a disgrace,” and his racist tweets that U.S. citizens “go back” to the “corrupt” countries they came from to name a few. Perhaps the pro-lifers — indeed all of us — should remember what Pope Francis said: “We cannot tolerate or turn a blind eye to racism and exclusion in any form and yet claim to defend the sacredness of every human life.” Remember that “pro-life” has never meant a concern for only one issue. And that sometimes it might be better to face reality than to fear the future.

Gene Scheffler and Kathleen Burke-Scheffler
Ascension, Minneapolis

Concern misdirected

I am very disappointed in The Catholic Spirit and some of the Catholic leaders. You are already complaining about Joe Biden, and he isn’t our president until Jan. 20, 2021 (“Bishops group to monitor Biden policies vs. Church teaching,” Nov. 19). Where were you when you should have been complaining about the present president, who is anti-Christ? You stuck your head in the sand the same as when priests were abusing children. Christ did not lie. Christ was not immoral, a racist, narcissistic, prejudice, vindictive or a bully. The present president constantly lies and you take his word instead of understanding that he was just pandering for Catholic vote. In “Let Us Dream,” Pope Francis criticizes populist politicians who whip up rallies in ways reminiscent of the 1930s and the hypocrisy of “rigid” conservative Catholics who support them.

Lee McGee
St. Dominic, Northfield

Attack on human dignity

Pope Francis calls the death penalty an attack on the dignity of the person and deems capital punishment “inadmissible” in all cases in the updated 2018 Catechism. As Sisters of St. Joseph, we value the sanctity of all life. We are impelled to boldly “oppose the use of the death penalty.” The U.S. in 2020 awaits its ninth and tenth federal executions of Brandon Bernard (Dec. 10) and Alfred Bourgeo (Dec. 11) after a 17-year hiatus. Three additional executions are planned for January 2021. Now the U.S. Justice Department is considering the use of firing squads and the electric chair for federal executions by quietly amending its protocols. In this Advent, we consider Jesus’ mercy and forgiveness. Praying and seeking to be signs of love to those on death row, their victims, and families, we invite you to advocate for an end to our nation’s use of the death penalty.

Sister Cathy Steffens, CSJ
Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet Leadership Team, St. Paul

Do away with elections?

I felt a need to offer some response to a letter in the Dec. 3rd issue of the Spirit, titled “Supreme evaluation,” in which the writer says of the recently-completed election, “Let the U.S. Supreme Court hear the lawyers’ arguments and arrive at a decision.” My first question would be, arguments on “what”? At this point even Attorney General William Barr — one of President Trump’s most loyal and constant supporters — has said that his Justice Department can find no evidence of any significant election fraud. Also, Republican election officials in states such as AZ, GA and PA have all said the election was fair and honest and they can find little to no fraud. My second question is, does anyone remember folks suggesting after the 2016 election, won by Donald Trump, “Let the Supreme Court decide it”? I guess I do not remember that, even though that year Mr. Trump won the three deciding battleground states of WI, MI and PA by about 78,000 votes — while Mr. Biden won those same three states by about 250,000 votes this time around. Lastly, and most importantly, the letter writer and others of a similar mind should keep in mind the fact that the U.S. Constitution says presidential elections are to be decided by the Electors from each state — which are currently determined by the popular vote outcome in that state. The Constitution says nothing about any court, including the Supreme Court, being routinely used to determine the outcome of an election — just because one candidate or one “side” doesn’t like the initial outcome after all votes are counted. If courts were to decide the election this year, then Americans might as well forget about bothering to vote, ever again. The Supreme Court could simply meet and select our president from a list of major party nominees.

John Ewan
St. Rose of Lima, Roseville

Witnessing to mercy

This letter is with reference to the article “Bishops group to monitor Biden policies vs. Church teaching” by Mark Pattison of Catholic News Service in The Catholic Spirit, Nov. 19. In this article, Archbishop Jose Gomez, the president of the USCCB, is quoted that with a Catholic president-elect we are facing a unique moment, with opportunities but also certain challenges. The “challenges” seem to have gotten more of the attention of the USCCB than the opportunities because a special working group headed by Archbishop Vigneron was established and charged to address issues surrounding the election of a Catholic president and policies that may come about that would be in conflict with Catholic teaching and the bishops’ priorities. In this approach, the USCCB projects an image of being primarily concerned about Catholic issues. In fairness, the concern of the USCCB for the pressing issues of the nation and the world is hinted at by the comment of Archbishop Gomez later in the article where he mentioned immigration, aid to refugees and the poor, racial justice, capital punishment and climate change. These issues should also be monitored by the special working group under Archbishop Vigneron. We need our bishops to provide leadership to keep the complementary faces of mercy for the unborn and the already born alive during a time of dangerous polarization.

Richard Podvin
St. Odilia, Shoreview

Remembering Father Wittman

I would be remiss if I didn’t add a couple of footnotes to Barb Umberger’s very nice obituary for Father Peter Wittman (“Father Wittman remembered as kind, humble, devoted to Catholic education,” Oct. 22). Along with all of his pastoral assignments, Father Wittman’s wisdom was appreciated to the point that he was appointed to the Archdiocesan Corporate Board. More importantly, though, from my personal perspective, he also served as a member of the board of directors of The Catholic Spirit Publishing Co. from 2000 to 2006. He was always so in touch with the needs of the people in his parish that he was a real asset to me and The Catholic Spirit’s editor and staff. It’s not a coincidence that during Father Peter’s term on the newspaper’s board The Catholic Spirit was winning scads of awards in the Catholic Press Association annual journalism awards program — 22 one year! — and in both 2004 and 2006 the Spirit won first-place for General Excellence as the best large-circulation diocesan newspaper in North America. He was a wise adviser to those of us on the newspaper staff, and one of the nicest people I’ve been privileged to know.

Bob Zyskowski, former editor and associate publisher of The Catholic Spirit
Bonduel, Wisconsin

Vaccine decision

In Father Pacholczyk’s commentary “Should I get vaccinated?” (Dec. 3) he states a commonly held idea that “on rare occasions adverse events do occur.” In 2007-2010, the CDC funded a $1 million grant to a Harvard research group — Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Inc. — to identify how effective the current reporting system is for adverse reactions. It was found that adverse reactions are not rare, but are under-reported with fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events reported. This highlights the importance of letting each person being able to choose for him or herself, or a child, if a vaccine or a disease is riskier given their current health. Health care providers should compassionately seek to answer patients’ questions, rather than pressuring, dismissing concerns or terminating them from their care.

Cara Carlson
Epiphany, Coon Rapids

‘Recover better’

“Human Rights Day” was December 10 — honoring that date in 1948 when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted by all the world’s nations through the United Nations General Assembly. The UDHR was, and continues to be, a landmark document that proclaims that dignity, equality, respect and freedom are inalienable rights for every human being. It is the foundation of international human rights law.

This year, the day’s theme was “Recover Better,” focusing on the need to build back better from our COVID-ravaged world, ensuring that universal human rights are central to our recovery efforts. This virus has exposed and worsened inequalities and prohibitions. We now have the opportunity to greatly reduce — if not totally eradicate these horrific injustices. We are all interconnected — collectively responsible for the well-being of our planet. Let’s imagine that ending this pandemic will bring a new era of global solidarity and sustainability, ending wars and militarism. Worldwide peace and harmony!

Bill Adamski
St. Joan of Arc, Minneapolis

Political rhetoric

I am writing to express my sadness and disappointment regarding Sister Helen Prejean’s comments regarding Donald Trump in the article about federal execution measures. I do support our Church’s declaration regarding capital punishment, but I fail to understand the vehement remarks about President Trump. I am so very tired of hearing this man vilified over the past four years. I agree with Sister’s strong position on capital punishment, but I do not agree that you should have published the angry, almost hateful statement about Donald Trump. A few editions back, you published objective considerations about the issues around the election, and I found that helpful and balanced; but statements such as the one in this December 3 article strike me as hateful, judgmental, and out of order for a Catholic Christian to make. I also found myself pondering: is executing the guilty worse than executing the innocent? Regarding abortion, Trump is the most prolife president we have ever had. I read every issue of the Catholic Spirit that I am blessed to receive, but please, it’s time to leave the very dark political rhetoric behind.

Ruth Schiller
Sts. Joachim and Anne, Shakopee

True transparency?

I’m finally getting around to reading your Nov. 19th issue and your coverage of the “McCarrick Report.” I think your coverage’s two headlines (“McCarrick report documents repeated lack of serious investigation” and “Report’s X-ray look into U.S. abuse scandal digs up pain, hope in transparency“) tell us in a nutshell the scandal over the past half-century and the scandal of the present and future. What’s the scandal of the present and future, you ask? To me, it’s the “X-ray look” that digs up only pain and hope in transparency, because this implies that the “X-ray look” probably won’t arrive at the deepest truth, namely the homosexual network within the hierarchy. I pray that I’m proven wrong.

Roland J. Mayer
Epiphany, Coon Rapids

Share your perspective by emailing [email protected]. Please limit your letter to the editor to 150 words and include your parish and phone number. The Commentary pages do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Catholic Spirit.