Ramblings about the St Louis Review

A month ago a letter to the editor concerning the 2007 Farm Bill making its way through Congress appeared in the St Louis Review, the archdiocesan newspaper. And while I have always been supportive of and inclined to lobby for the benefit of family farms and those whose livelihood depends on the success of family farms, something about the letter struck a nerve with me.

The letter (http://www.stlouisreview.com/article.php?id=13184) begins:

Editor:

Farm bills aren’t just for farmers.

Shortly after July 4, Congress will finalize this nation’s most important piece of food and farm legislation — the 2007 Farm Bill.

This comprehensive piece of legislation affects our health and nutrition, rural development, conservation and relationship with our neighbors throughout the world for the next five years.

I urge all readers to contact their representatives in Congress and speak up for this issue, specifically to:

Enhance food stamps and school lunch programs so that more fruits and vegetables will be affordable to these recipients.

Provide incentives and grants for rural areas that truly help farmers and towns rather than new suburbs which the present bill is often doing, as reported in the Washington Post on April 6.

Appropriate dollars for important conservation programs that protect water, soil and air.

Curtail government subsidies to farms whose gross adjusted income is greater than $200,000 and use the $55 billion savings for the above listed programs and to help small and middle-size family farms.

-------------
Fundamentally, I can support all of the above except the last one, where the limit of an adjusted gross income $200K, which seems low even for the small to intermediate family farm. Since I'm not 'clued in', as it were, to the precise details, or where the good sister obtained her information suggesting this level, I must rely, instead, on common sense and experience.

But let's move on:

...For Catholics, who turn to the Scripture and Church teaching for guidance, and for all believers, these questions and choices have fundamental ethical and human dimensions."

Check the website of the National Catholic Rural Life Conference, www.ncrlc.com, or NETWORK, www.networklobby.org, for full information.

Sister Barbara Jennings, CSJ
Regional field organizer
NETWORK organization
St. Louis

------------

Now this is where prudence and responsibility, at least in my mind, has been abandoned. Sr. Jennings could have avoided contaminating her letter had she excluded her last sentence and her affiliation with Network. At the very least, it seems to me that the "Editor" at the Review, as is his/her prerogative, could have invoked editorial discretion and excised the 'offending' or potentially scandalous portions of the letter.

However, since this was certainly not the first time such questionable items have appeared in the Review, I fired off the following letter:

To whom it may concern:

A recent Letter to the Editor by Sister Barbara Jennings, CSJ, concerning the 2007 Farm Bill, contains a number of points which might be well worth considering. However, a thorough reading of the bill would seem to be advisable to determine its details.

Still, it should be noted that the good and worthy recommendations made by Sister Jennings, in fact, become tainted and suspect when she concludes the letter by providing questionable web site links for more information. One wonders who, if anyone, checks web site addresses in Letters to the Editor for inclusion in the Review? Sister Jennings’ letter proposes that readers check the “Network Lobby” web site, which is, as I understand, a site to be avoided at all costs.

Trinity Communications (Catholic Culture), a Catholic organization supporting fidelity to the Holy Father and the Magisterium of the Church and which has been evaluating web sites since 1996, reviewed “www.networklobby.org” as recently as September 27, 2006. The evaluation reads, in part:

DESCRIPTION
Network is a national Catholic social justice lobby providing "a progressive voice within the Catholic community that has been influencing Congress in favor of peace and justice for more than 30 years." Essentially a radical feminist interest group, Network was founded by Carol Couston, O.P. and a group of 47 disenchanted nuns. While the group refuses to take a public stand on abortion, it is heavily invested in left-wing politics, judges issues through the lens of "women's experience," and promotes eco-feminism and socialism/Marxism. This organization should be avoided altogether.

WEAKNESSES
* Founded and run by dissidents (Fidelity)
* Links to dissident sites (Fidelity)
* Promote events sponsored by Leadership Conference of Women Religious, Call to Action, and Pax Christi USA (Fidelity)
* Focuses exclusively on material "justice" for this world with no view to the next (Fidelity)

The full report from Catholic Culture can be read at http://www.catholicculture.org/reviews/view.cfm?recnum=1933

It is alarming that such a Letter to the Editor be printed in the Review without someone checking to determine if questionable or dangerous links are offered for the “enlightenment” of the faithful. Certainly, the editorial board of the Review would not approve inclusion of such sites as “Women Priests” or the “Rainbow Sash Movement” – would it?

Hopefully, a correction or update of some sort concerning this matter will be forthcoming in the next edition of the Review. I would prayerfully request that more diligence be exercised in the future as such questionable web sites could be a source of scandal and confusion for many Catholics.

Sincerely in Christ,
(signed)

CC: Most Reverend Raymond L. Burke

And where am I going with this?

In the Nation and World news section of the July 20th edition of the St. Louis Review, readers are presented the following article (from Catholic News Service), titled:
Catholic online group shows war opposition, and which includes such "notable" groups as Chris Korzen's 'Catholics United', Pax Christi USA, and, of course, Network.

In the article (http://www.stlouisreview.com/article.php?id=13336), CNS states that:

Catholics United is a national online organization of Catholics. Founded as Catholics United for the Common Good, the group came out of a voter education project to promote the U.S. bishops’ 2003 document, "Faithful Citizenship: A Catholic Call to Political Responsibility."

It should be noted that this group voiced its opposition to Archbishop Burke's Pastoral Letter, On Our Civic Responsibility for the Common Good (Oct. 2004) and presents distorted views of Catholic teaching and the Catholic's obligations regarding his moral responsibilities. A few examples might be worth reviewing:

The Catholic Voting Project Responds to Archbishop Burke's Pastoral Letter

Archbishop’s Pastoral Letter Cites Five ‘Non-Negotiables’

Catholic Answers - THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN

A Planned Parenthood Press Release

The liberal Catholic voting guide * Bettnet.com

Mark Shea-Whores For Edwards Tries More Damage Control

It's debatable whether the CNS 'Catholics United' story is newsworthy. I contend that it is not, particularly as it comes from the news agency of the USCCB which is not particularly noted for its fidelity and orthodoxy - that and the history of these groups and their activities.

The unfortunate reality is that, by printing these articles which promote dissident and heterodox groups, the St Louis Review gives, at a minimum, tacit approval of these groups and their agendas. And in so doing, as the Review is the communication arm of the Archdiocese, that approval appears to be coming from the Archbishop - and that defies logic and rational thinking.

Given the nature of some of the articles that the Review has chosen to cover and print, one wonders if the roots of dissent are really present at the office of the archdiocesan paper and if so, how deep and embedded are they? Or is this type of 'editorial oversight' due to a lack of understanding. Or am I overly sensitive because so many could be scandalized or unduly influenced by such groups?