Blogger Priest

There is the story in the news about a Colorado family angry with the Catholic Church over counseling and conversion therapy that they claim played a role in a young woman’s suicide. Alana Chen was, according to all accounts, a beautiful lady, a talented musician and an avid Catholic. As a teenager she thought about becoming a nun. When she questioned her sexuality, she sought out priests at the parish that ministered to students at Colorado University. The bishop assigned the Sisters for Life to mentor students in the cause of life and chastity. Against her wishes, the young woman’s mother said that the sisters convinced her daughter to take conversion therapy. Her mother interpreted the religious intervention (counseling and therapy) as an extended “emotional and religious abuse.” Alana became increasingly “depressed, distraught, and suicidal.” At 21 she had formerly attempted suicide and three years later apparently succeeded. I cannot imagine the pain that her mother and family experienced and still must face each day without her. While left unsaid, I have to think that the priests and sisters involved deeply grieve her loss as well. Most priests are haunted men, always praying for and unable to forget those whom they feel they have failed.

St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Center in Boulder released the following statement regarding the accusations:

“We are devastated over the death of Alana Chen and cannot begin to imagine the pain and grief of her family and friends. Our prayers will continue to be with them during this incredibly difficult time. For those of us who had an opportunity to know Alana, we will remember her as a young woman who was eager to serve God and others and had a tremendous love of the poor. She will be greatly missed. Striving to be a community who welcomes anyone and everyone as Jesus did, we reject any practices that are manipulative, forced, coercive or pseudo-scientific. We believe that every person is a beloved child of God and should be treated with dignity, mercy, and reverence.”

I hope that she has found the peace that alluded her in this world. Rest in Peace.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

The Germans are entering into a “synodal way” this January and a number of figures involved suggest that they will make decisions that will impact the global Church. Given the inordinate German manipulation of the Amazonians, it is presumed, somewhat jokingly, that they have already had their synod. Maybe this is part 2? Will the notorious Pachamama make a surprise return engagement? If there is a parallel paganism, I am betting it will be the sensational homecoming of the ancient Germanic fertility goddess, Nerthus.

Matthias Koopp, the spokesman for the German bishops stated, “The binding nature of the findings will be the responsibility of all those officially involved. Depending on the issue, the Apostolic See or the local bishop will be responsible for their implementation.” Nevertheless, there will certainly be discussions and feedback about the authority of bishops as a conference and how this impacts particular dioceses and individual bishops. No doubt there will also be interaction on the relationship between the local or national churches respective of papal authority. The scandals that have recently plagued the Church have compromised the trust and the authority that leadership previously possessed. The German consultation will take two years.

The somewhat notorious Cardinal Marx has pre-planned the areas for discussion and has appointed the leaders to the four working groups. Cardinal Marx advocates giving the Eucharist and sacramental absolution to couples in irregular (adulterous) unions, intercommunion in mixed marriages between Catholics and Protestants and greater openness to LGBT relationships. He has also planted himself on the side of those who question mandatory celibacy for priests.  He openly dissents from the notion that women cannot be granted holy orders (deacons and maybe even priests). Indeed, he seems to interpret the scandals as fortuitous as they have stripped the bishops of any moral standing to speak upon sexual issues like the use of artificial contraception.

The more cynical voices are already crying “foul” and that the “fix is in.” Just look at the selected categories:

(1) Power, Participation, Separation of Powers,
(2) Sexual Morals,
(3) Priestly Existence, and
(4) Women in Services and Offices of the Church.

How can a church of 23 million Catholics in which only one in ten regularly practice (2,300,000) dare to speak to a universal Church of a billion plus people?

Will the laity invited as consultants singularly represent the faithful remnant or will their number also include the vast number of dissenting voices from those who have have fallen away?

Why should those who are no longer Catholic in belief and practice be given a voice for the future direction of the Church?  Given that we invoke the protective agency of the Holy Spirit, would it not be better to restrict the consultation to believers who constitute the genuine sensus fidelium?

A quarter of German parishes have closed since 1990. We are told that 2,000 priests in 2000 dropped to 13,560 in 2017. But the figure is worse given that 2,712 of these priests are from abroad. The numbers of native German priests has dropped to 10,848 (down almost by half in seventeen years). Instead of worrying about the Church in the rest of the world, the Germans should narrow their focus to themselves as they now constitute a dying church that is in desperate need of life-support.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

Past Problems with Interpretation of the Book of Revelation

While Catholic churchmen certainly acknowledge that Christ will return, and that there will be a harvest of souls and judgment, we tend to shy away from attempting to interpret the many mysterious elements in the Book of Revelation. While the pagan emperor was viewed as an antichrist, there have been many antichrists throughout history and likely at the end of history. The Church, like her Lord, is opposed by the world. The heretical Montanists (135 AD to 177 AD) interpreted the Book of Revelation so as to expect Christ to return soon and establish a New Jerusalem in Asia Minor. The Hussite Taborites (15th century) interpreted Revelation as prescribing violence or insurrection as a prerequisite for the second coming. Anti-Catholic fundamentalism has imagined (based on a political view of the Apocalypse) all sorts of end-times scenarios from the 1960’s to the present.

St. Augustine Speaks of Two Cities & Judgment But Sidesteps the Book of Revelation

I would side with St. Augustine who argued against taking the Book of Revelation literally. Joachim of Fiore’s commentary was overly speculative and the utopian world under the Holy Spirit never materialized. (He argued for an age of the Father, of the Son and a third one under the Holy Spirit.) We may speak of our time as the age or as the season of the Holy Spirit, but the Church would not mean what he intended by the label.

Probably No Thousand Year Earthly Reign of Christ

The theory of millennialism is that Jesus would have a thousand year earthly reign. While certain Catholic thinkers speculated about it, this notion is not an element of official Catholic teaching. However, a number of non-Catholics have picked up on the idea and teach this as a facet of their end-times scenario.

Anti-Catholics Wrongly Employ the Book of Revelation in Their Bigotry

The danger with interpretation throughout is demonstrated again and again as largely unreliable. Scripture should speak to us but many turn this around and read too much into the Book of Revelation. The Protestant reformers wrongly identified the papacy with the antichrist and the Catholic Church with the Whore of Babylon. It becomes an occasion for blasphemy against the Holy Spirit and opposition to the house built by Jesus.

As a parish priest I am really not the one to ask for an exegesis concerning Revelation.  I would suggest asking authorities in Scripture. 

Filed under: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

QUESTION

My daughter is 16 and wants to be on birth control. My husband and I are against this. What should we do?

RESPONSE

First, while it might seem obvious, ask her why she wants birth control. Make sure that you know what is going on. Are there any medical reasons why she may need contraceptives to control menstrual pain and excessive bleeding? Is there a boy who is pressuring her to surrender her virginity? Is she already sexually active? Many young people would probably not even bring this up with parents. They would just do what they are going to do. The fact that she has opened up to you says volumes about how you have raised her. She is being honest with you. Be equally frank but also compassionate with her. The transformation from a child to an adult is not easy. If mistakes have been made, no matter how angry you might feel, let her know that she is loved and that you will always be willing to forgive and help her.

Second, while you would not want her to become a teen mother, a Catholic Christian would become complicit with sin be paying for contraceptives and enabling, even if indirectly, a promiscuous lifestyle. She is living under your roof and as parents it is reasonable for you to want any minors to live by your values. What they do when they grow up and move out is up to them. Right now, they are dependent on you for clothes, shelter, food and money. Kids who are not yet able to take care of themselves should not be sexually engaged. Playing house is not the same as actually keeping one with hard work and sacrifice. Gauge, as best as you can, her current maturity as this will impact upon the advice you give and her capacity to understand and accept.

Third, let her know that you love her and discuss the value of purity. Has she had any instruction on the theology of the body and why couples should wait until they are older (and married) before having intimate sexual relations. If she is a committed Christian, direct her attention to the bible passages that discuss the sin of fornication and how it can cost us a share in the kingdom of God. The ideal is not jumping from bed to bed but to find a stable long-term and committed relationship.

Fourth, know that your stance will find opposition among her peers, teachers and others. She may even cite them against you. Remember that public schools regularly distribute condoms to youths and in several instances school nurses have assisted youths in getting abortions. They will argue that it is only natural that she wants to explore her sexual identity and that if you are “good” parents that you would “understand” and want to protect her. Little credence is given abstinence from this quarter. There will be an effort to “guilt” you into changing your minds. It may even be thrown into your face that you, as a couple, used contraception or became sexually active when younger. If such is the case, let her know that you only want her to avoid the mistakes you made. Let her know as well that women, with or without birth control, are often victimized and abused in promiscuous sexual relationships. They are frequently exploited and their dignity as persons is cheapened as no more than “meat” for men who place lust over (real) love.

Fifth, discussions between a mother and daughter about sexuality can be opportunities for wonderful female bonding; but do not go along with the crowd that says a sixteen year old should initiate a carnal life. Talk to her about the joys of being a young woman and her natural attraction to boys. Speak frankly about helping young men to be their better selves and looking for a man that would respect her as a person and not simply want to exploit her body. Speak of the sacred elements of marriage as well as about the perils of teenage sex, especially about HIV and the venereal diseases that afflict millions of people. Sexual intimacy and the marital act should be directed to the fidelity of spouses and to the gift of life. It is horrendously corrupted when reduced to self-seeking pleasure and the pollution of the flesh. Sex should be directed to life. When misdirected, sex ushers forth death, in diseases that afflict the partners or in the killing of children, either through direct abortion or through the abortifacient action of numerous contraceptives.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

I received the following message from a man named Patrick a few years ago. It is a story I hear again and again from others.

“In 2007 I went with my wife to see our priest in Florida about our marriage. Although my wife had filed for divorce, I told the priest that I did not want to get a divorce. The parish priest said, while pointing his finger at me, that he believed our marriage, quote— ‘. . . should never have happened.’ I told him that I had come for help to save my marriage. I told him that I expected him to defend the Catholic sacrament of matrimony. He repeated, ‘The marriage should never have happened.’ We have four young children who attend school at his church. The priest advised my wife to be lenient with child custody. Leaving the rectory on the school grounds, I repeated my admonishment to the priest, ‘Defend the sacrament of marriage.’ He then said to me, ‘Get out of my sight, you arrogant bast-rd!’ On our way home after the meeting with the priest, my wife said to me, ‘You see, even the priest believes we should divorce!’ I know you will not believe what I am saying. But it is absolutely true. You can contact me or my wife to verify it. I want to know— what can I do now? My wife is in the last stages of this divorce and she is living with another man. Time has passed since my encounter with this priest and (for obvious reasons), I believe there is no way to repair the marriage situation. But as far as I am concerned, the priest to whom I went for help was instrumental in shattering any hope to resolve the situation with my wife. He threw his weight and that of the Church behind her decision. I have stopped attending church since this incident. I still pray. I am angry and I find it difficult to remain silent. Sometime in the future, when all my pain is gone, I will pursue this priest in the Church under ecclesial law. I cannot forgive this priest for what he did to me, particularly when I was foolish enough to go to him for ‘help.’ He committed the greatest sin.”

Here is the response that I sent him:

I am so sorry Patrick for what you have gone through. There are cases where marriages are difficult to save, particularly when there is abuse and fear. However, I am sickened when people simply say they fell out of love or found someone they liked better. I do not know the grounds for her divorce and have not heard her side; however, you are right, whenever possible a priest must both safeguard the well-being of the spouses and the sacrament of marriage. It is not the role of a priest to urge divorce but rather dialogue and reconciliation. You mention that your wife is in the end-stages of a divorce but living with another man. Does she think that most priests would also rubber stamp adultery? If she attempts an annulment you have every right to share your side and how you view the sacramental nature of the bond. Be honest about it, even if it means that she would not be able to get the annulment. Anything else short-changes the process and is an offense against truth. Know that not all priests would have acted like the one in your story. I will keep you in my prayers. Her departure from your life and home is a terrible cross. Bring your struggles and pain to your penitential observances. Do not blame the Church for the callous actions of one priest and the abandonment of a wife who failed to return the love you had for her.

The diocese in which you live may have resources for coping with the loss and for dealing with the repudiation of the priest. Bai Macfarlane has developed a national campaign against no-fault divorce and appealed her husband’s divorce to both the civil courts and the Roman Rota. She may have some useful information to share with you, too.

Her webpage is: http://www.marysadvocates.org.

Her email is: ma.defending@marysadvocates.org.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

A harsh critic of the Church in the modern world makes these critiques:

Remember the visit of Pope John Paul II to America when he told the Nuns to wear their habits? Sister Kane answered for American Nuns by telling the Pope, “We have come too far for that”! Can you believe that name Sister Kane (Cain)?

So how can we be surprised by Priests that wear Hawaiian shirts and are substantially homosexual? After the Council substituted man in the place of God, can there be any limitations? The Novus Ordo Mass is an ad-lib-a-thon! All of the built-in defenses of the Faith have been systematically removed.

Gold Chalices and Patens are gone. The Priest no longer keeps his fingers together as a visible sign that he has touched the Sacred Species. We no longer kneel at Communion Rails. We laugh and talk and hug and shake hands. We refer to the Mass as a meal, not as a sacrifice. Eucharistic Ministers travel in packs around the Altar Table that has replaced the Glorious Main Altars. Martin Luther would be sooo pleased! These things don’t happen at a Latin Mass.

I used to like Hawaiian shirts before I was ordained, and as a young man it gave a guy that Magnum P.I. “Tom-Selleck-Look.” I fail to see the homosexual connection. As for my Catholic faith, along with millions of others, we still place our trust in Jesus Christ and render him fitting worship. Who is worshipping men? What is this substitution he is talking about?

Sure, we have dissenters, but they do not speak for the Church. Sister Kane insulted the Pope back in 1979. I was in the congregation and heard her in Washington when she had her few seconds of mutinous fame; however, most everyone there was embarrassed by her. She did not speak for us. Dissenters on the left and anachronists on the right also make a regular habit of insulting the Pope, first John Paul II, later Benedict XVI. Now, a number on the right, including traditionalists go out of their way malign Francis. (This is not to discount the possibility of respectful fraternal correction.)  Many only quote the Pope when it suits them. Not that the Pope is always correct in personal opinions or practical judgments, but many regularly assume that they know better than the Pope and the living Magisterium. Progressives discount authority altogether; Anachronists seek to interpret and make their own the words of dead Popes against living ones.

The Mass, no matter what the lawful rite, East or West, poorly conducted or masterful and beautiful, is still the unbloody sacrifice of Christ on Calvary, offered for the remission of sins. I may not like one rite over another, but I would be the last person to blaspheme against the Holy Spirit in impugning the efficacy of any Eucharist promulgated by Mother Church.

Few priests can afford solid gold or silver chalices and patens; but a few of my rich friends still have them. Most vessels, even prior to Vatican II, were brass with electroplating in gold. Almost all the priests I know use such chalices and patens. Indeed, the use of ceramics, glass and other such materials is generally prohibited. Again, abuse cannot be attributed to the Church, only to the dissenter.

Some priests still keep the fingers together throughout communion until the ablution; but it is no longer a rubric and I fail to see how any offense is otherwise made against our Lord in the sacrament. While the sacred particles are safeguarded, we should not become overly scrupulous.

Admittedly standing has become the general posture for reception, but I have never refused communion to those who kneel. Indeed, Rome asserted not long ago that altar rails in older churches should not be removed. In the early Church these rails were four feet high and not even intended to assist those kneeling for Holy Communion. The rail was to separate the holy of holies, the sacred space, from where the people stood. We have several parishes where people still receive Holy Communion while kneeling at a rail. It is a pious tradition and I have no problem with it. Rome has said that priests cannot prohibit kneeling, either.

Yes, there is too much noise and talking in churches. But, we can work with our local priests to restore a sense of sacred silence. As for shaking hands, I suspect the critic means at the sign of peace. Actually, the old Latin actually made reference to a sign that had disappeared from the liturgy. Unfortunately, priests need to offer repeated catechesis on it. It is not a how-do-you-do handshake. It is not a romantic kiss— unless you are going to give the same sign to everyone around you— which is quite silly. It is a handshake yes, with simple words— PEACE BE WITH YOU. Other words should not be added and people should remain in place and not circumnavigate the church. The Pax of Christ signifies the unity in the mystical body of the Church. It is the rebuttal to the person who says he does not need the Church; that he can come to Christ alone. Any personal relationship with Christ that denies the corporate is a lie. Christ called us as a Church and so we signify unity in Christ. This unity is shared with our priest and the whole Church. We have one faith, one Lord, one baptism! It is in the unity of the Church that members, reconciled with God and with one another, come forward to receive Holy Communion.

The Mass is BOTH a meal and a sacrifice. It is a participation in the heavenly marriage banquet of the Lamb. The mystery of the Mass flows from its institution at the Last Supper and from its historical enactment with the oblation of Christ on Calvary. Emphasis of one element to the extent that the other is eclipsed would be heresy. The Church keeps both in a healthy tension.

I doubt our Lord had a glorious marble altar when he offered the first Mass; and certainly the cries around Calvary could hardly be the beautiful chants that once adorned the liturgy. Nevertheless, the mystery remains the same— altar of marble or wood— vessels of brass or gold— the true treasure beyond measure is Jesus Christ, who is made present to us in his priest and in the sacrament— bread and wine transformed into the resurrected body and blood, humanity and divinity, of Jesus Christ, our Lord.

I suspect this is the faith of the critic who wrote me as well, despite an apparent spirit of enmity.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »