Missed the Mark

In reviewing Million Dollar Baby (Of Clay and Wattles Made, 2/14), Richard A. Blake, S.J., surprised me by the reference to this intelligent, compassionate priest. I felt that the ordinary, everyday pastoral ministry of the priest sure missed the mark in this film.

(Rev.) Eugene F. McGovern

Fields and Tables

The article on genetic engineering by Gerald D. Coleman, S.S., (2/21) lays out a framework for evaluating the arguments for promoting genetically engineered crops to meet the problems of world hunger As one who has been engaged in this debate for some time from a practical, political and ethical perspective, I cannot let pass unchallenged his remark that it was a moral disgrace that in 2002 African governments gave in to G.M.O opponents and returned to the World Food Program tons of G.M.O. corn simply because it was produced in the United States by biotechnology. Had the author been in Zambia in mid-2002, when the government, after very serious scientific study, rejected importation of the G.M.O. maize pushed by the U.S. government, he would have commended this move as a moral necessity to protect lives of both present and future Zambians and to safeguard the agricultural infrastructure of the small-scale farmers who produce 80 percent of the local maize.

In fact, the real moral disgrace was that the U.S. government refused to provide financial assistance for the purchase of the readily available non-G.M.O. maize offered to Zambia by several countries, such as Kenya and India. A more honest analysis would ask whether the United States is so adamantly pushing genetically modified crops on humanitarian grounds to feed the hungry or on economic grounds to support its own heavily subsidized agricultural sector. If there is truly a humanitarian interest as the primary concern, why did the U.S. Embassy to the Holy See reject participation on the panel of its September 2004 conference by any representative of those national bishops’ conferences such as the Philippines, Brazil and South Africa that have cautioned against use of G.M.O. crops, or by any scientific voice critical of this approach? Surely such censorship of divergent opinions is another moral disgrace.

For those who have questions about whether G.M.O. crops are necessary to feed the poor who are hungry, let them leave libraries and laboratories and come to the fields and tables of a country like Zambia to see how local farmers can feed and are feeding people without genetic engineering being introduced.

Peter J. Henriot, S.J.

A Fifth Conclusion

Bishop Emil A. Wcela is right, in A Dangerous Common Enemy (2/21), that consumerism and its accompanying expressive individualism are at the core of many affluent Catholics’ decision to stay away from most forms of community. He mentions four conclusions about the practice of the faith todayparish involvement, a strong family, greater emphasis on spiritual education of the laity and the need to be part of a larger Catholic communitythat are all very important to maintain a sense of the common good.

I would add the preferential option for the poor that is central to Catholic living. The Faith in Focus article Looking Into the Heart, by Peter A. Clark, S.J., illustrates this. A relatively affluent family spends a week on a Navajo reservation and are transformed in the processespecially the children, who realize that poor families in the canyons are truly wonderful Christians even without all the trappings of modern living.

This idea of volunteer vacations makes sense. Maybe affluent Catholic families from Long Island could spend some time with poor families to see how the other half lives. We even have some of these poor communities here!

Edward J. Thompson

On the Reservations

The article Looking Into the Heart, by Peter A. Clark, S.J. (2/21), is a joy. It is another expression of seeing God in all things that was exemplified in his article and one more clear example of the gift of America. There continue to be innumerable articles, stories, reflections that give more and more expressions of lives lived in the midst of seeing God in all things. Thank you.

The article again evidences the power of the written word to draw us ever nearer to the God who loves us so and the power of action in the name of the Lord to remember that God is with us. Perhaps more important, from my own experience it seems ever clear that the action and events described are evidence of a God who is merciful to the Navajos, their guests and all of us.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we all seized this moment to experience the mercy of God and reach out to freely grant this mercy to others we meet on the reservations we have created in our lives?

Thomas Ludlum

Message Getting Through

This letter has been a long time coming. I’ve often wanted to write to you, having read America for over 40 years. The Word column has been an integral part of my preparation for Sunday Mass. At times I’ve known the authors personally. Of all the authors in the intervening years, Sister Dianne Bergant’s words have most resonated with me. My wife, Louise, and I appreciate her work more than words can convey. I’ve read every word since the first installment; they have been an inspiration for my desire to learn how to pray.

The culminating incentive to write is to share with you a story that any writer would like to hear. We are cafeteria Catholics who seek out the best liturgy and preaching. Our favorite homilist on the Third Sunday in Ordinary Time began his sermon with a question: Can you hear me now? (1/17). He began with the advertisement and proceeded to make the sermon his own. The other church we attend is staffed by Dominican priests. A prayer group I’m in at that church closed the meeting on the following Wednesday with the leader quoting the beginning of that pastor’s sermon for the previous Sunday: Can you hear me now? Sister Dianne, regrettably, may not be allowed to preach officially in a Catholic church, but her message is sure getting through in other ways.

Ray Terry

Medieval Practice

Thank you for your well-reasoned editorial about the number of innocent people condemned to death in America, and the public’s growing distrust of a flawed death penalty system (2/7). Wrongful convictions, however, are not the only problems evident with this medieval practice. The system is arbitrary, unjust and riddled with inconsistencies. Death sentences are doled out overwhelmingly to poor defendants and racial minorities who kill whites. More than 90 percent of executions since the death penalty was reinstated in 1977 have taken place in states of the former Confederacywhat’s called the Death Belt. While proponents claim that the death penalty deters crime, no study has ever demonstrated this. State killing is revenge, pure and simple. As you pointed out, a sentence of life without possibility of parole protects society and stops the cycle of violence. We commend the Catholic Church for its leadership on this issue, and look forward to the day when the government no longer stoops to the crime for which it punishes the perpetrator. To quote Bishop Gabino Zavala, auxiliary bishop of Los Angeles, The power to take a life is God’s.

Jeff Gillenkirk