SLUH Review 1.2

ET COGNOSCETIS VERITATEM ET VERITAS LIBERABIT VOS

SLUH REVIEW Vol. 1 Issue 2

A journal of Faith, thought, and civics

The Responsibilities of Freedom

by Dominic Lanari

October 6, 2009

people in their districts. Unfortunately too many of our representatives do not think of themselves in that way. Instead they think of themselves as parental figures who believe they know what is best for us and should be able to tell us what to do or not do. Nothing could be further from what the Founding Fathers intended.

Once President Obama decided to postpone the date that Congress would vote on his healthcare bill until after their August recess, a great amount of uncertainty surrounded the response that senators and representatives would receive from their constituents back home. Our representatives in the legislative branch of the government announced that they would be holding town hall meetings to educate the citizens in their districts about how the healthcare bill would affect each of them. They would also listen to the views and questions of the citizens and try to formulate their opinions based on what these people wanted. However, no one could have predicted the immense number of people who showed up nor how passionate they would be.

Since the inauguration of President Obama I have heard many varied opinions of what the people should do. Some on the far left believe that we should all relax now and let Obama, a rather smart guy, do what he thinks is best for the country.

Others on the far right believe it would be best to leave the country altogether because they are afraid of the effects that the policies Obama is implementing will have.

I believe both of these opinions, if shared by a large amount of people in the country, would be ruinous for America, and the rest of the world for that matter. The people who believe in leaving important decisions up to the President now are the same people who, 30 years from now, will have to explain to their children why they will have to work 90 hours a week to pay for Obama’s stimulus package which was supposed to bring us out of an economic recession, but cost American taxpayers $787,000,000,000 and was handed out like candy: $200,000 to fund a tattoo removal clinic in California, $900,000 for the Chicago Planetarium, $2,192,000 for the Center for Grape Genetics in Geneva, NY.i

This brings us to two important questions.

What are the responsibilities of the government?

What are the responsibilities of we the people?

We all have our God-given rights. These rights include life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, the right to own private property, and so on. The Declaration of Independence, among saying other things, tells us that “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

So quite simply, the government is here to make sure that nobody is intruding upon our rights. Also, without us giving the government our permission to govern us, they have no power. Because we as individuals are not as capable as a government of protecting our rights, we gladly give them our consent. Because we have asked them to do this work for us, we have a responsibility to pay them through our taxes and inform them of how we want them to be doing their jobs. This makes us their board of directors because we choose our representatives, giving them jobs, and should be able to advise them concerning the needs of the

These are a few of the worst examples of billions of hard-earned dollars being thrown away, but some people just continue to sit back and let the President “do his job.” Because of the laziness of these people, the standard of living for future generations will be worse with income taxes rising to 60 and 70% because that will be the only way to get out of debt. On the other side, some people have considered leaving the country. This idea is simply 1

not rooted in common sense. First of all, at least right now, America is still the country that can best guarantee individual freedom. Where else are these people going to go? Secondly, people who give up on their country when she is in need are people with no backbone. Imagine where our country would be today if George Washington decided to surrender because it was too cold at Valley Forge, or if our sailors had deserted their navy ships because they were afraid of the Japanese kamikazes. Martin Luther King said, “Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals.” ii Therefore, no good can come from taking the easy way out or taking shortcuts which you think will get you to the same destination as the route which involves pain, courage, and strength. Freedom is not free. Our freedom has been purchased with the blood of our soldiers who have died all over the world and continue to be killed to this very day. If you do not stand up to protect your freedom, someone will rob you of it instantly.

have a great amount of pressure on us to succeed in school, sports, music, drama, and everything else.

The best thing to do is to do your best to develop the gifts that God has given you, and take advantage of being at the best high school in St. Louis. There are very few people in this country lucky enough to go to a school as awesome as SLUH. By working hard here, you will increase your chances of getting into the college of your choice, succeeding there, and in five to ten years time bringing your competitive spirit into the world of business, medicine, education, or any other line of work you choose to pursue. You can only control yourself and your own actions, but by working hard, you will have a huge influence on your classmates and inspire them to compete and join the group of people in the country who contribute to making it better.

Questions and Answers Regarding the Latin Mass

by Logan Hayward Question 1: Why would I want to listen to the Holy Mass in an unfamiliar language, every Sunday?

To answer this question, I will pose another: can you, the reader, focus more on words when they are written or spoken? Personally, I am able to focus more on the written word, because I sound out the words in my head in order to comprehend them, at my own speed. Of course, the Latin Mass is spoken and sung. However, unlike most English masses, the Latin oratories provide missals, so that the attendants may read along as they listen. One doesn't need to understand Latin to be able to read along. And reading the missal allows me, at least, to focus more on prayer and reflection.

Clearly both of the aforementioned radical opinions are very poor ideas and to take either path would lead to immeasurably harmful results. So what should we do? What are our responsibilities as a citizen? To start, we should find out what the major issues of our time are and educate ourselves about them. We should educate ourselves about the founding of our country, the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, etc. We should take stands on issues based on the truth we can find in the Bible, the Church, and our own consciences.

We should also study history to observe policies of previous governments and how their plans for economic success, social justice, and good foreign relationships have succeeded or failed. Then, with our constitutional right to freedom of speech, we must inform our representatives of how we want things done. If they do not listen, there had better be a good, logical reason. If they call us Nazis, racists, or mobsters, then it is our duty to both let them know that their days as our representatives are numbered and to follow through with our threats when they are up for reelection.

Question 2: It's still hard to follow the ceremony, even with a missal, so why shouldn't I go to a Mass where I can follow along?

I doubt that the first time I went to an English Mass, I followed along instantly.

Familiarity with a certain kind of mass increases with experience. I believe that it is actually easier to "follow along" with the Traditional Latin Mass, because it can be read by the parishioners, and because the focus is on the sacrament, rather than music.

“That sounds great,” you may say, “but I don’t really consider myself an activist. Is there anything else I can do to help my country?” This response is fine, especially considering that we are still in high school, we have busy schedules, and

Question 3: Why should I pray in a language that is not only unfamiliar, but dead?

2

Latin may not be spoken widely, but it was used by the Church for centuries, and in fact is still the official language of the Church. To throw away the Latin Mass because people no longer speak Latin in daily conversation, is to throw away all the years in which the Church heartily endeavored to perfect the Mass while vernacular languages were preferred over Latin in daily conversation!

Perhaps because Latin is not generally used in daily conversation, it has been preserved from the stains of overuse and oversimplification. Latin fits the Church because it is logical and beautiful.

article is on why the government will have to ration even if they don’t want to.

The basis of my article is the basic economic principle of supply and demand.iv If you do not know what Supply and Demand is, you can look it up. But for the purpose of this article I will give a short summarized definition. Supply is the amount of product that the company has. Demand is the amount of product that the consumers want to purchase. The goal of the market is always to have supply and demand equal. If the demand is higher than the supply, the company raises prices. Since the prices are higher less people are willing to buy the product and the supply and demand is evened out. If demand is lower than the supply then the company lowers the price. Since the product is now cheaper, more people buy it and the supply and demand is evened out.

Question 4: The Church has changed since Vatican II, why would we want to resurrect something that has died?

The Truth never dies. If the Latin Mass really is a beautiful way to celebrate Christ and draw nearer to Him, then it has to succeed eventually. If the Church in the industrial world really does want to increase its base, then parishes will eventually offer the Traditional Latin Mass in order to quench the thirst of the lost souls who desire an ancient and reverent ceremony to accompany the Eucharist. I have read that George Gershwin, perhaps the most famous American composer ever, once asked Maurice Ravel to give him piano lessons. Ravel responded that such lessons would only make Gershwin a bad Ravel, when he was already such a good Gershwin. The Church should taking lessons from modernity, because it already such an effective way of expressing Jesus' love for us. I declare my desire that the Holy Church start offering, in every parish, at least one mass which is proud to be Catholic, proud to be beautiful, and proud to stand amidst the chaos, proclaiming that the Truth is eternal, in the language of our ancestors.

So let’s look at the government’s plan. They want to offer free health care to everyone. Since it is free (and some argue that you will be forced to take it), demand will be high and it can not be lowered (no one will allow them to charge money for government-run health care). The government will lose tremendous amounts of money on this (everyone knows that it isn't free to actually provide for the care). The only way the government would be able to give away free health care was if they had tremendous budget surpluses and tremendous amounts of money to spend on it. But, according to Bloomberg news, as of March, the Congressional Budget Office estimates this year's budget deficit to be about $1,850,000,000,000, or 1.85 trillion dollars.v And also, the budget deficit for next year (starting in October) is estimated to be approximately $1, 500,000,000,000, or 1.5 trillion dollars.vi

Why We Must Ration Health Care

by Willie Kohler

So it is obvious that the government will not have the money to be spending on health care. (It should also be pointed out that the Congressional Budget Office almost always underestimates the cost of things, and so it a logical and safe assumption to say that the budget deficits will be much higher) Since the government goes not have any spare money to spend on health care they will have to ration. Let’s return to our example of the company.

The title of my article comes from an article of the same name by Peter Singer, Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University and a writer for the New York Times. Singer's article talks about why they should ration the government health care plan if it is passed,iii that people are not worth the cost that it takes to keep them alive. What Singer believes are good social solutions are directly opposed to the values of the Catholic Church and therefore, the values of SLUH. On the contrary, my

The company is offering free ice cream to everyone. The ice cream is not free to produce,

3

however, and so the company loses money every time they give away ice cream. Since the company is losing money by giving away ice cream, it is no longer profitable. It would be more profitable to the company to not offer free ice cream to anyone. Or they can offer free ice cream to only a few of the customers. By doing this, they decrease the amount of money lost (it costs less to give away less ice cream). The company still loses money, but not as much as they would have if they had given away free ice cream to everyone, and they’ve still accomplished their goal of giving away some free ice cream (good publicity).

vi

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid= aNaqecavD9ek

To this some people might respond, “The government isn’t a company! They aren’t out for profits!” And they would be correct in saying this.

But the government would not be aiming for profit, but rather, neutrality, i.e. deficit neutrality. I will retell the story of the company with the government put in for the company: The government is offering free health care (given: health care is not free for the government to provide). The goal of the government is this project is not to earn profits, but rather to avoid losses. And so the same logic I have shown with the example of the company applies here. The government will try to offer free health care to everyone, but it will be tremendously expensive. And so the government (aiming to have a deficit neutral program, i.e. not lose any money by giving away health care) will ration health care. The previous citations of the government’s estimated deficit would apply here as well. They do not have any free money to spend. So, like the company, they will aim to cut losses by giving away only a little health care to everyone.

i

http://www.heritage.org/research/budget/upload/porktable.ht ml

ii

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/martinluth164 280.html

iii

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/magazine/19healthcare -t.html

iv

http://www.investopedia.com/university/economics/economi cs3.asp

v

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?sid=a3FY84ILxIUc& pid=20601087

4