The blog header depicts an important and yet mis-understood New Testament scene, Jesus flogging the money-changers out of the temple. I selected it because the faith that gives us consolation can also make us very uncomfortable. Both Divine Mercy and Divine Justice meet in Jesus. Priests are ministers of reconciliation, but never at the cost of truth. In or out of season, we must be courageous in preaching and living out the Gospel of Life. The title of my blog is a play on words, not Flogger Priest but Blogger Priest.
The late Cardinal Hickey was acutely aware of the problems with accountability in regard to the new media. However, this also led to our slow acceptance of the internet as a forum for communication. Every word placed online supposedly passed through his office first. Indeed, it was during his tenure that Fr. John Brady’s Ministr-o-Media audio tape ministry was shut down. The archdiocesan effort was housed at the Pastoral Center and had gained a national reputation for wonderful programs about the faith, spirituality and American Catholic Church history. If the masters still exist, these are gems that might be placed online as mp3 files. The aging priest is still with us and I am sure he would be delighted to resurrect these resources.
The move to greater utilization of the internet is way overdue, but it also brings with it inherent problems of accountability. We would want to insure that anything presented has the stamp of approval of the Church. While the Church gives approbation to books, she has not caught up with how to do the same for rapid internet communications. On the other side of the equation, how can we insure that those taking online classes are indeed the ones seeking certification? Various programs for credit, as with Dayton or Catholic Distance Learning employ proxy-testing to insure that the desired learning is acquired by the designated persons.
Organizational history may be helpful in this regard. Back in the 1970’s and 80’s we saw the proliferation of video and audio resources, although quality was often dubious and much of it was neither initiated nor trusted by ecclesial authorities. Even now, many lay Catholic evangelists write and produce media for apologetic purposes with little or no official oversight. Cardinal Wuerl was one of the few American churchmen to embrace the media with his Teaching of Christ television program being a staple in certain markets for almost two decades.
The early effort of the bishops to create a satellite channel never really got off the ground and paled by comparison to independent efforts like Mother Angelica’s EWTN and the smaller private or diocesan efforts as in New Orleans and Boston. I recall attending several local meetings where directors bragged about the thousands who could watch (for a hefty fee) the round-table discussions and catechesis. However, large satellite dishes were required and recipients were often reduced to large schools and hospitals. The sad truth that we had to face was that almost no one was really watching. Millions of dollars were wasted.
The Archdiocese of Washington had an opportunity to take possession of a low-power television station back in the late 1980’s but the priest who was our communications and media director turned down the opportunity. I suspect that it entailed more work than he was prepared to render. Here was a case where instead of putting our best people on a project, the Archdiocese assigned a troubled priest who had returned to ministry after an unapproved leave-of-absence. He eventually walked away entirely from his ministry as an archdiocesan priest to pursue teaching musical theater at American University. He is now a renegade “gay” priest who regularly offers Mass at Dignity gatherings.
A particular challenge facing us is that a secular culture and its media is no longer either neutral or a partner in the transmission of Christian faith and morals. Our archdiocesan Church administration seeks to remedy this by a modification of a classroom or lecture approach to adult catechesis and continuing faith formation to an online and/or recorded format. This is understandable, because it is the easiest approach, and extends strained resources, but it may not be wholly effective given the widespread competition for the hearts and minds of believers. The basic change that we see in the archdiocesan effort in Washington is the increased reliance upon online resources. This is a good step, but will it be enough? Maybe we can do more than insert “talking heads” into pop-up video frames. For instance, skyping holds great promise in bringing people together in real time. We must also move away from stagnant webpages to dynamic-interactive pages. Many still treat the webpage like a piece of paper. This fails to respect the many applications and potential it holds. We must begin to think outside the proverbial box.
And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. (John 2:1-4)
Jesus mildly rebuked Mary for trying to command him. It shows that Mary is not perfect and she had no right to interfere in His business. Jesus honored her anyway to fulfill the commandments He gave to Moses.
FATHER JOE: Mary is “the Woman” and she does not argue with Jesus. She tells the steward to do as Jesus says; she knows there will be no debate. Such reminds us of the power of prayer. Mary asks and she receives. There is no rebuke of Mary. You merely fail to appreciate a manner of speech. Jesus will again call her “Woman” on the hill of Calvary. She is the Woman, the new Eve, and at the Cross, the Mother of the Redeemer becomes the Mother of all the redeemed.
CHARISSE:
But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. (Matthew 6:7)
Why do priest advise repetitive prayers, when it says here not to? “Our Father” prayer is a model for praying but should not be prayed like a mantra. Prayer loses its meaning when you do so.
FATHER JOE: Ridiculous! Our Lord was criticizing the repetitious nonsense words recited by certain pagans. They wrongly thought that if they stumbled upon a deity’s secret name they might have some power over him. Catholic prayers are not gibberish. Others thought that with accolades they might bargain with God. This is also foolishness. God is sovereign and he holds all the cards. Catholics repeat certain prayers (like the Hail Mary) as elements of meditation. It also acknowledges that we are creatures who live in time. Each moment is an opportunity for “becoming” and grace. The Lord’s Prayer constitutes the very words of Jesus and his word never grows old or forfeits its power. It also gives us a pattern of prayer. Repetition in itself is not bad, like breathing and the heart beating; when it stops, we die. Some repetition is a good thing.
CHARISSE:
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. (Mark 7:6-9)
The Catholic Church (and many other religions) have more tradition and commandments of men than of God.
FATHER JOE: I cannot speak for other religions, but Catholics have a sound appreciation of the sources of revelation. The Bible itself emerged from the adoption of the Hebrew Scriptures and an oral and written tradition. Letters and books were collected. The Church was preaching and worshipping even before we had a completely compiled and/or authored Bible. This Sacred Tradition continues to this very day. The commandments of God are combined with the laws of his Church, providing order and guidance to men. Christ gave his shepherds the authority to loosen and to bind.
CHARISSE: As for the rosary and purgatory, it is not in the Bible unless the Bible you have is altered.
FATHER JOE: The Catholic Church is the Mother of the Bible. You would have no New Testament without her. Purgation reflects the mercy of God and reflects the Jewish practice of praying for the dead (see 2nd Maccabees). But maybe you cannot, because you are the one with an abbreviated or incomplete Bible. As for the Rosary, it is simply a manner of prayer. Most of the meditations of the Rosary are mysteries from Scripture. But I doubt you give much time to pondering such things given that you are more about attacking the faith of others than building up your own.
CHARISSE: Buddhism has prayer beads too and do their prayers as mantra or chants.
FATHER JOE: And Islam has the Koran. Critics might compare it to our Bible and argue that both camps are misguided to trust in holy books. Similarities mean nothing in this context. The trouble is that you are so closed-minded and such a reductionist that you will grasp at straws to attack the Catholic Church. It is a terrible sign of your spiritual impoverishment.
CHARISSE: Also once you’re dead, you are dead. There is no purgatory or second chances.
FATHER JOE: You do not even understand what you ridicule. Purgatory is NOT a second chance. If you have damned yourself then you are destined for hell— the end of the story. All the souls of Purgatory are going to heaven. Purgatory is a purging or healing as they approach the throne of God. They are perfected by the fire of God’s love. Sinners must be more than forgiven, they must be changed.
CHARISSE: When you pray for the souls of the dead, it has no effect and you become like the pagans that do the same. You have only one life to live here on earth, and after that it’s either life everlasting in God’s kingdom or eternal death.
FATHER JOE: We pray for the dead so that we might join our love to that of God for our beloved dead. Prayers will not rescue the damned. Once they enter heaven, they have no more need of our prayers. However, we do ask the heavenly saints to intercede or pray for us. The reason you fail to appreciate this stems from two things: (1) a faulty view of justification and (2) a negligible understanding of the Church and the communion of the saints. We are a community. We do not come to God alone. At the final consummation there will be two realities, heaven and hell. Believers hope to live with God forever in the heavenly Jerusalem.
CHARISSE:
Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. (John 3:3)
People are born of sin because of the sin Adam and Eve committed; it is not because of your profession, or ceremonies you do, or privileges of birth, or whether you were raised from a Christian family or not, or how religious you are that you are saved.
FATHER JOE: We are conceived with original sin. Through faith and baptism we are regenerated, born again, made into a new creation. The sacraments of the Church are a way in which we enter into the mystery of salvation. We encounter our saving Lord through the proclamation of faith and in the body of the Church. Christ has redeemed us. As Christians we live in the “real and certain” hope of our salvation.
CHARISSE: It is by the mercy and grace of God that when you yourself decide to follow Him & accept Him as your ONLY Lord and savior, that he changes your heart and life. That is when you are baptized & given salvation, and not the baptism you were given when you were a baby. The baptism you take in flesh as an adult is a symbol of you being born again, and the actual baptism is when the Holy Spirit changes you inwardly.
FATHER JOE: Our Lord speaks about a Church and obedience. Saving faith is not merely a verbal profession or a private activity. Catholics acknowledge the whole truth that we need both a personal and a corporate relationship with Christ. You would make baptism optional or even something readily dismissed. Philip did not think so when he baptized the Ethiopian eunuch. It amazes me how some can so privatize faith when the Scriptures speak throughout about the Church. At Pentecost the Spirit of God did not come upon one individual, but upon many. It is a gift given to the Church. The Holy Spirit makes conversion and faith possible. The Holy Spirit inspires the Scriptures, protects the Church’s shepherds in the truth and gives efficacy to the sacraments. You would deny this work of the Spirit over the living Church where he continues to abide.
CHARISSE: So unless you are born again as it says in the Scripture, you will not see the kingdom of God, nor if you knowingly and continue to sin after being born again. But Catholics do not even emphasize that in their teaching.
FATHER JOE: You know nothing about Catholic teaching. We are cognizant that faith can sour. We urge fidelity and obedience to God. We ask for God’s mercy when we sin and we have the wonderful sacrament of Penance where we receive absolution, the mercy of Christ.
CHARISSE: Now I see on Facebook going around my Catholic relatives to pray to St. Michael, the archangel, to protect the conclave.
FATHER JOE: The angels are about the business of God. St. Michael is regarded as one who has been given a measure of power over Satan. It makes sense that his intercession might be sought in these perilous times. But, whatever happens, we trust the guiding presence of the Holy Spirit to safeguard the Church.
CHARISSE: God is a jealous God. No matter how you say that the prayers are directed to God, you are still praying to those who are not God, when there is no mediator but Jesus who is God.
FATHER JOE: No, you are quite wrong. All prayer, even intercessory prayer, has as its proper object, almighty God. We ask the saints to pray for and with us. Again, this is an expression of our corporate faith and union. Christ is still the Mediator between heaven and earth. Christ is still the sin-offering that purchased us at a great price.
CHARISSE: I hope you are certain about what you preach because those who lead the people will have a great responsibility to God, for they are responsible in leading them to either God’s kingdom or to a great deception that will lead to their eternal death. And their punishment is greater.
FATHER JOE: I am absolutely certain. If this were not the case, I would never go through the motions. I am also certain that you are in the wrong. The reason I respond is that I hope you might begin to reconsider your posture to Catholics.
CHARISSE: Many Christians are in hell for not preaching the Truth.
FATHER JOE: I leave entirely in God’s hands those whom might or might not be in hell. But I would warn you as I have others to be cautious so as not to blaspheme the Holy Spirit and his work.
CHARISSE: By God’s leading, thru Jesus, and His Holy Spirit, I know where I stand and His truth has set me free. I have a lot to work in my life and my self, because God said to be holy for He is holy, and be perfect for He is perfect, but by God’s grace and mercy He will help me and I pray that He will do the same for you and many others.
FATHER JOE: I would not want to attack your faith as you would assault that of Catholics. I take you for your word that you count yourself a friend of Jesus. But remember that everything is grace. You cannot save yourself. Even your obedience, which God desires, is not that which will save you. Everything is a gift. The Spirit of God calls us to repentance and faith. The Spirit of God moves us to prayer and prays in us. Apart from Christ our works have no value; and yet the works of Christ, on the Cross and in our lives has immeasurable worth. We were made in the image of God. But now through Christ we can be refashioned into his likeness.
CHARISSE: I cannot change you nor convince you, that is for sure, Only God can. So I hope he reveals the same to you and move in your life. God bless!
FATHER JOE: Many of our Protestant brothers and sisters love the Lord and there is a measure of truth in their faith. There are many issues upon which we disagree and some of them may be significant. God knows the sincerity of our hearts and will not utterly condemn those ignorant of the full truth. However, some are also infected with a belligerence and blindness that comes from a dark spirit. He numbs consciences and closes minds to the truth and hearts to compassion. The devil hates the Catholic Church. Believers of any sort should be wary of doing the devil’s work. Amen.
A valid point is made. The administration is arguing that you can be a Christian or a business owner, but you cannot be a Christian business owner. Such a narrow and part-time view of the faith is a violation of the true definition of faith and freedom.
Isn’t it interesting these days that people label and identify themselves by their sexual orientation (or disorientation)? Well, this is not totally true, we don’t see news headings reading, “Darn, another heterosexual elected!” Mark my words, bisexuals will set the groundwork for more than so-called legal same-sex marriages, but rather for a new version of polygamy with married threesomes.
This is not a laughable matter. The division in our nation is an issue that must be seriously addressed. Millions of Americans feel disconnected from the national leadership. It is tragic that even one person should feel that it has come to this. What is needed now is not arrogance, but genuine dialogue. We need a rational discussion, not an emotional one that is manipulated by the media and special interests. Half the nation is sticking with the President and half still feels we are going in the wrong direction. It seems there is tolerance for everything except traditional values and faith. I am also troubled by the dismissal of the Constitution by certain leaders and ignorance of its importance by the constituency.
They are going to appoint government “porn” inspectors to make sure that performers wear condoms. There will be a permit fee that will pay their salaries. I don’t even want to think about the weirdos who will be lining up for that job. Pleeease, just go back to banning the business altogether!
And what happens to a society and its laws when Islamic populations reach 51%? The remnant Christians, Jews and secularists will soon find out but the hints can be found in countries where it has already happened.
The United Nations is pushing for legalized prostitution in the Philippines. When such an organization sides with those who traffic in human beings and degrades the dignity of women and human sexuality, then it forfeits any genuine moral standing. Mark my words, we will see this evil promoted as a civil right in our own contry before long. Of course, it will not be for health reasons but so that vice can be taxed. Government then becomes a pimp and gets part of the action.
This administration stood by and watched Americans get murdered. The knee-jerk response of the state department was an apology for any offense to the terrorists and Islam. Meanwhile Marines on the ground were left unarmed and vulnerable themselves. I know the election is only weeks away, but this sort of ineptitude should be challenged from all quarters and both major parties. This should be beyond routine politics!
Gads, even nature is conspiring against us. What next, a volcano in Rome? Oh well, only a few weeks before elections… and possibly the end of the Church in America as we know it.
Tax, tax, tax, that is all some government officials think about, regardless of Constitutional guarantees. No wonder certain conservatives labeled themselves the Tea Party, reminescent of an earlier tyranny. I would not be surprised if they should start taxing the air we breathe. Meters would be implanted at birth, that is if the children are allowed to be born. Now where is my Super Soaker Water Gun (legally banned in Loudon, Virginia) and my BB Gun. Hum, will they also tax my BBs? Ah, making the world safe for flower-hungry rabbits!
It must be hard not to be partisan when we must deal with deception. I will not even try to remark about the presidential debates. Here is a USCCB statement about Biden.
The saints suffer much from a world that stands in opposition to the Gospel of Life. If millions or even a few thousand people engaged in such “non-violent” civil protest, think how it would change the moral and political landscape. But most of us tolerate evil and are afraid; or we are on the “other” team.
You can’t give a kid an aspirin at school without parental permission, but the school can give young girls contraceptives and abortifacients. Would not even so-called pro-choice parents want some level of notification… particularly given the possibility of serious medical consequences? (This is besides the issue that the school counseled and enabled the killing of a grandchild.)
This government leader in Pakistan wants a global law that would impose Islamic law upon anyone who insults his religion or Muhammad. Such would trump American freedoms regarding speech. He has put a bounty on the head of a man who made a blasphemous movie about Muhammad, indicating that he would impose a worldwide sentence of execution for blasphemy. But why should we be worried, after all, Islam means peace.
God forbid that young people at school events should get a taste of traditional American liberties, like freedom of religion and freedom of speech… NOT! Schools can teach science and the faith of atheism but are to make no mention a Creator. Schools can teach safe “promiscuous” sex and give away condoms, but not a penny is available for abstinence education. Schools are forbidden to teach the 10 Commandments and then wonder why youth misbehave and get in trouble with the law. All manner of vulgarity is tolerated but not a bible verse on a sheet… yep, these girls are real trouble-makers, but the right kind. When Islamic religious fanatics burn the flag, destroy property and commit murder… we target our sights upon peaceful Christian cheerleaders at a school football game. Ah, the world is insane!
How many Catholic chapels are there in Islamic schools? Where does courtesy end and religious indifferentism begin? How does one reconcile this with the insistence that “Catholic identity” is not at risk in our parochial schools? Do the Jewish children get their private prayer space as well? What about the Wiccans and Satanists? Do they get chapels to honor the goddess and/or the horned beast? Certainly, we would not want to discriminate or be judgmental… would we? Ah, the plight of radical tolerance!
If trash television were not trasmitted at all then such accidents would not happen. The truth is that our children are exposed to unhealthy and vulgar images all the time. We cannot trust television to babysit our children. It is a compromised media. The providers are more interested in making money, even with virtual prostitution, then in helping parents to raise kids of good moral character and virtue. In any case, if adults are themselves corrupted by this media, then how can they pass on anything of value without the poison of hypocrisy?
With a “firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,” let us close this convention by praying for this land that we so cherish and love:
Let us Pray.
Almighty God, father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, revealed to us so powerfully in your Son, Jesus Christ, we thank you for showering your blessings upon this our beloved nation. Bless all here present, and all across this great land, who work hard for the day when a greater portion of your justice, and a more ample measure of your care for the poor and suffering, may prevail in these United States. Help us to see that a society’s greatness is found above all in the respect it shows for the weakest and neediest among us.
We beseech you, almighty God to shed your grace on this noble experiment in ordered liberty, which began with the confident assertion of inalienable rights bestowed upon us by you: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Thus do we praise you for the gift of life. Grant us the courage to defend it, life, without which no other rights are secure. We ask your benediction on those waiting to be born, that they may be welcomed and protected. Strengthen our sick and our elders waiting to see your holy face at life’s end, that they may be accompanied by true compassion and cherished with the dignity due those who are infirm and fragile.
We praise and thank you for the gift of liberty. May this land of the free never lack those brave enough to defend our basic freedoms. Renew in all our people a profound respect for religious liberty: the first, most cherished freedom bequeathed upon us at our Founding. May our liberty be in harmony with truth; freedom ordered in goodness and justice. Help us live our freedom in faith, hope, and love. Make us ever-grateful for those who, for over two centuries, have given their lives in freedom’s defense; we commend their noble souls to your eternal care, as even now we beg the protection of your mighty arm upon our men and women in uniform.
We praise and thank you for granting us the life and the liberty by which we can pursue happiness. Show us anew that happiness is found only in respecting the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Empower us with your grace so that we might resist the temptation to replace the moral law with idols of our own making, or to remake those institutions you have given us for the nurturing of life and community. May we welcome those who yearn to breathe free and to pursue happiness in this land of freedom, adding their gifts to those whose families have lived here for centuries.
We praise and thank you for the American genius of government of the people, by the people and for the people. O God of wisdom, justice, and might, we ask your guidance for those who govern us: President Barack Obama, Vice President Joseph Biden, Congress, the Supreme Court, and all those, including Governor Mitt Romney and Congressman Paul Ryan, who seek to serve the common good by seeking public office. Make them all worthy to serve you by serving our country. Help them remember that the only just government is the government that serves its citizens rather than itself. With your grace, may all Americans choose wisely as we consider the future course of public policy.
And finally Lord, we beseech your benediction on all of us who depart from here this evening, and on all those, in every land, who yearn to conduct their lives in freedom and justice. We beg you to remember, as we pledge to remember, those who are not free; those who suffer for freedom’s cause; those who are poor, out of work, needy, sick, or alone; those who are persecuted for their religious convictions, those still ravaged by war.
And most of all, God Almighty, we thank you for the great gift of our beloved country.
For we are indeed “one nation under God,” and “in God we trust.”
So dear God, bless America. You who live and reign forever and ever.
Amen!
Note: The major networks purportedly cut away from the convention and did not show the prayer.
The SSPX has made no secret of its opposition to the teachings about religious liberty both espoused at Vatican II and in the recent USCCB campaign against government intrusion.
We have faced many challenges to our religious liberty. At one time Catholics were forbidden entry into certain colleges like William and Mary. Catholic churches were burned and our worship was curtailed. Later there was the issue of public education and the reading of Protestant bibles. Catholic schools emerged to insure the faith of generations of children.
In more recent times there has been the issue of prayer in schools, the celebration of religious holidays and public symbols, and the status of the Sabbath or Sunday blue laws. The emphasis has shifted from a preference given to the Protestant faith over the Catholic, to an atheistic secular humanism that is hostile to all faith. Today, there is a concerted effort to force the Church to compromise on matters like homosexuality, artificial contraception, and abortion. Will the Church face charges of hate-speech for opposing same-sex unions and homosexual acts? Will the Church be forced to pay for contraceptives, abortifacients and sterilization in healthcare plans? How far will this fight go and how strong and courageous will we find Catholic churchmen. And will the Catholic people stand with their shepherds or with an anti-Catholic modernity? We would expect that traditionalists would be of one mind with conservatives on such matters; but such is not always the case.
The Church would not argue that religious liberty is absolute or that it “necessarily” applies to all creeds equally. However, the principle of religious liberty and freedom of conscience are critical to the Church’s understanding of human dignity. The more a religion reflects the objective order and spiritual truth, the more that faith must remain free from coercion. Mormons once taught polygamy and were rightfully corrected by the federal government. Satanism is restricted on military bases because occult services in the nude conflict with the military code of conduct. Sometimes peculiar things are tolerated in other religions so that the Church herself might benefit from non-interference, matters like the pacifism of Quakers and rigid alcoholic temperance. Then there are acts that cause quite a bit of debate, matters like snake-handling, the prohibition of blood transfusions (Jehovah Witnesses) and interdictions toward inter-racial dating. However, there are also clear limits as with ritual euthanasia, human sacrifice, bondage or trafficking, and the abuse of children.
Furthermore, society has the right to defend itself against possible abuses committed on the pretext of freedom of religion. It is the special duty of government to provide this protection. However, government is not to act in an arbitrary fashion or in an unfair spirit of partisanship. Its action is to be controlled by juridical norms which are in conformity with the objective moral order. These norms arise out of the need for the effective safeguard of the rights of all citizens and for the peaceful settlement of conflicts of rights, also out of the need for an adequate care of genuine public peace, which comes about when men live together in good order and in true justice, and finally out of the need for a proper guardianship of public morality.
These matters constitute the basic component of the common welfare: they are what is meant by public order. For the rest, the usages of society are to be the usages of freedom in their full range: that is, the freedom of man is to be respected as far as possible and is not to be curtailed except when and insofar as necessary. (DignitatisHumanae #7)
Given the persecution of the Church in England, the separation of the Church and state was interpreted as a way to protect our interests. While an ideal state is one where the Church and state are in harmony, history has proven that such unity is hard to achieve and even harder to maintain. There was also the unpleasant side-effect that with the Reformation, the creed of the land followed the local prince. While such was legally tolerated in Europe to prevent bloodshed, this arrangement was very unfair to Catholics who felt abandoned by Rome and a Catholic Europe. Religious liberty in the United States permitted the Church to expand at a rate that surprised even the Holy See. Marylanders rejoiced to be liberated from the penal laws. Our Catholic school system grew to be second to none. It must be added that the separation of Church and state never meant a disavowal of traditional religious values or culture. Such is the extreme that we see today from organizations like the ACLU and the liberal People for the American Way. The American state was viewed by many of our founders as a Christian one, not atheistic as some contend today.
The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right. (DignitatisHumanae #2)
If everyone were Catholic, we might presume that the public values and laws would reflect this fact. But states that are largely Catholic do not always remain sympathetic to the Church. Mexico in the 1920’s would be a case in point. The rupture of the Reformation took place in what were formerly Catholic nations. Never underestimate original sin and the hunger of men for power.
While we might hope and work for the day when earthly realms would recognize Christ and his Church, we leave such eventualities to divine providence. Anything else would be a pelagian nod to earthly utopias. Our emphasis is always upon the kingdom of Christ which is ushered in by God’s grace.
Some critics, particularly within the SSPX, would criticize the model of religious liberty taught by the late Fr. John Courtney Murray. They go so far as to fault its promulgation at Vatican II as the source for global apostasy and secularization. However, Father Murray simply gave voice to what he saw as the American experiment. I would argue that it was not an ingredient in the subsequent conflict with modernity, Vatican II or no Vatican II.
It is simplistic to demonize the council or to give a heightened importance to the pre-conciliar Church that it did not possess. The council was an attempt by the Church to respond to a changing world. Not everything worked out and many purposely distorted the meaning and purpose of the gathering. However, the world’s bishops did gather, it was a legitimate council, and the Pope ratified it. Those who utterly reject it will find themselves in opposition to a crucial Church teaching— that the universal Magisterium so gathered is safeguarded by the Holy Spirit. It is no wonder that those who oppose the council are neither united to the majority of the world’s bishops nor in juridical union with the Holy See. There are only two options open to critics of the council. Either there was a misapplication of the council by those who invented a “spirit of Vatican II” or there is no supernatural agency protecting ecumenical councils, the Magisterium and the Pope. It is for this reason that castigating the council is a very dangerous thing for a “faithful” Catholic to do. It leads either to a Catholicized variation of Protestantism or to atheism.
It is true that Cardinal Ottaviani shared a number of concerns about the council and his view regarding Church/state relations. It is no secret that this holy prelate was unhappy, especially given that his schema for the council was brushed aside and replaced. But he was only one man and in the end he was obedient. The fact remains that the majority of the world’s bishops and the Pope signed off on the council documents. The issue here is clearly one of ecclesiology. Pope Benedict XVI was at the council and yet critics would try and tell him what was what. The arrogance in all this is insufferable.
Church social teaching cannot be merely theoretical but must reflect the pragmatic reality of the world where we find ourselves. While there are stable elements, the political teaching reacts to the world around us: the disappearance of monarchies, the rise of democracies, capitalism and the world economy, the threat of communism, and increased secularism. Today, we would also add the effect of technology and communication, as well as the rise of fundamentalist Islam and their lack of tolerance toward the Church. The Church is seeking for ways to grow and arguing for its right to exist, no matter how societies might change.
Some critics contend that the “post-Vatican II Church” is apparently afraid to sanction those teaching heresy or promoting immorality; however, it is quick to enforce “disciplinary rules.” They resent that Archbishop Lefebvre was disciplined for consecrating bishops without a papal mandate while heretical priests remain in “good standing” to teach heresy and to actively dissent. I would argue that it is no less scandalous for traditionalists to dismiss the guidance of the Holy See. More than discipline is at stake but a fundamental view regarding ecclesiology and divinely appointed authority. The scandal is worse for those who feign fidelity to the Holy See while failing truly to obey the successor of St. Peter. No one expects fidelity from the liberal dissenters. Their only deceit is that they might still claim to be Catholic; but that is a shallow lie through which all but the most ignorant can penetrate. I would also argue for a heavier hand by the Church but I am neither a bishop nor the pope. I am sure the shepherds have their reasons for what they do. I suspect that the most liberal dissenters just do not respond to sanctions. The issue is not whether leftist dissenters have been properly punished; but, rather have breakaway traditionalists displayed sufficient contrition to have the last of their sanctions removed? I would place the highest gravity or wrong with the SSPX. They should have known better. Who knows what good their presence within the Church would have merited these past forty years? Instead, they abandoned her and circled the wagons. The consecration of bishops against the will of the Holy See threatened a parallel church. It is no minor crime. It deserves penance prior to absolution. I think this is the ultimate holdup. They can quickly find fault in Rome but wrongly imagine that they are immaculate and had no other recourse. What they did was wrong. It was a grievous sin. The Pope removed their excommunication, not out of justice but from charity. Pope Benedict XVI is a gentle man where I would have given them ultimatums. I am not convinced that the SSPX will ever return to juridical unity. That is my opinion and I hope I am wrong. Those who too closely align themselves with them, even if just for an anachronistic love of the old liturgy, may find themselves ultimately outside the lawful Catholic Church. They will join the Orthodox churches of the East in their schism from Peter, the ROCK of the Church and Vicar of Christ.
Certainly the license to teach theology has been stripped from numerous liberal theologians. Many have faced discipline and censure, such as: Fr. Leonardo Boff, Fr. Charles Curran, Fr. Matthew Fox, Fr. Hans Kung, Sister Margaret Farley, and Sister Elizabeth Johnson. The latter two were quite recent and Sister Johnson was my academic advisor many years ago in seminary. I have read all her books and concur with the evaluation of the U.S. bishops about the improper use of metaphor. It is so peculiar that liberal dissenters grieve about their treatment from the “right-wing” Holy See and yet certain arrogant traditionalists cry like babies that they are the only ones getting rough treatment. I would give them all a swift kick in the pants!
While there is much talk about a silent schism and a liberal fifth column of bishops who oppose Rome while weak bishops look on passively, I would include all four of the SSPX bishops as still another column opposed to the Magisterial teaching office and the living Pope. Those who castigate the council and Rome will become sedevacantists, mark my words. Liberal bishops are dying off and yet many of them would still bend the knee to Rome. The SSPX bishops have made themselves autonomous and the arbiters of all things Catholic. They want Rome to bend to them! Only the Magisterium under the Pope has the authority to interpret past Magisterial documents. The wolves are coming from every side; yes even some of the so-called sheep-dogs may revert to their wolfish ancestry. Defenders of the SSPX are wrong to say that four bishops (who are even fighting among themselves) can trump the Pope and 5,000 bishops who teach and minister in union with him! Sorry, but they are very much mistaken.
Addressing traditionalists, the Pope has given you the freedom to worship with the Tridentine Mass. You should be satisfied with that, say your prayers, raise your families, and steer clear of critiquing a lawful council of Holy Mother Church and the Holy See. Do not join the renegades, no matter what pretense to holiness or devotion they might exhibit.
I love our traditions. I see continuity in our faith. There is no pre-Vatican II Church. There is no post-Vatican II Church. There are various disciplines and rites, but old or new, there is only the Mass— the sacrifice of Calvary from which we receive the “bread of life” and the chalice of salvation”— the real presence of the risen Lord.
But I have no stomach for trouble-makers on the left or right. Pope Benedict XVI is the Pope. He is Peter. He is the Vicar of Christ. If you want to be saved, be subject to him and to those bishops in union with him— period.
Father Joe, what is your take on Father Bob Pierson?
FATHER JOE:
I had heard of him but had not followed the recent business about his ten minute statement that went viral attacking the initiative supported by the U.S. bishops in opposition to so-called same-sex marriages.
What the priest fails to appreciate is that conscience must be properly informed. Freedom of conscience is not relative moral license. Otherwise, the cause of conscience could be rallied not only for homosexuality but also for other evils like polygamy, bestiality and pederasty. Rather, true liberty comes with an orientation to that which is true and good. Obedience to divine positive law (as revealed in the Church through Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition) and natural law (as ascertained through the right use of reason to the objective order) makes us truly free. The commission of sin and immoral acts brings not freedom but spiritual bondage.
The priest in the video takes statements from the Church and churchmen out of context, much as a fundamentalist minister might from the Bible to support his claims. Cardinal Ratzinger, i.e. the Pope, has certainly always taught about the obligation in following conscience; however, he has likewise insisted that homosexuality is a serious sexual disorientation and that the commission of genital acts associated with it are intrinsically immoral.
Notice that he quotes Cardinal Hume who wrote, “Love between two persons, whether of the same sex or of a different sex, is to be treasured and respected.” His quote came in the context of a larger statement in the UK on the homosexual question. While it is certainly permissible to exhibit fraternal and platonic love, as in most friendships, it would be wrong to equate these words with sexual activity and or anal or oral sex. This is another instance where the priest’s remarks are deliberately deceptive. He is well educated and knows what he is doing. This makes him all the more culpable.
Father Pierson is selective in his quotes from the universal catechism. Note that he does not read from CCC #1601: “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.”
Although he attempts to bracket off sacramental marriage in the Church from civilly recognized marriages, such is only a shallow ploy to avoid personal censure and to elicit support from normally orthodox Catholics. The way that society views marriage informs and spills over into how the faithful understand the sacrament of marriage. Indeed, he, himself, is a staff member in an organization where a Protestant minister and an ex-Catholic bless same-sex unions. Understood in this light, Father Pierson is not only promoting immorality but is taking a heretical position toward one of the seven sacraments of the Church.
The speaker acknowledges that Pope Benedict XVI has declared that homosexuals should not be accepted as candidates for the priesthood. Father Pierson has “come out” that he is a homosexual who opposes Church teaching. We can only hope that he has kept his promise of celibacy. Regardless, he now ridicules the Holy Father and takes a scandalous position against the U.S. bishops and the Marriage Matters campaign. I should add, however, that marriage was threatened long before this issue of so-called same-sex marriage. Marriage was imperiled by growing rates of promiscuity, cohabitation, contraception, adultery, divorce (especially the no-fault variety), and remarriage outside the Church.
Father Pierson had resigned from his post as director of campus ministry after the Vatican officially barred men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” from ordination, and because of associated issues in the Church’s faith and moral teaching. “Because I can no longer honestly represent, explain and defend the Church’s teaching on homosexuality, I feel I must resign,” he said. It was also rumored that he was forced out, as he should have been, to avoid further intervention from higher-ups.
His local bishop, Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis has strenuously promoted the amendment in opposition to so-called same-sex marriage. He required parishioners in the archdiocese to recite A Prayer for Marriage as part of the General Intercessions at Masses. The U.S. bishops have been very clear in their opposition. Marriage is only genuine if it is between a MAN and a WOMAN.
Back in 1986, Cardinal Ratzinger, writing for the Vatican, made a statement for correction and support of a letter promulgated by the American bishops. Father Pierson selectively quoted him, but strangely and dishonestly, not this statement which speaks to the question at hand.
“Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder…. It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good. A person engaging in homosexual behavior therefore acts immorally.”
“To choose someone of the same sex for one’s sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator’s sexual design. Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent….”
“It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church’s pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.”
“But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.”
Father Bob Pierson, O.S.B. should be disciplined by his Benedictine order. He has caused scandal and given rise to public dissent from the Church. His faculties to function as a priest should be revoked or curtailed. As a man under ecclesial obedience, he should either publicly recant his dissent or face immediate dismissal. A priest who recommends mortal sin is no longer aligned with Christ. Even if he should be demented or ignorant, he is now on the side of the evil one.
STEPHEN:
Father Joe, I agree with everything you said, albeit except for maybe one small clarification. You write, “Understood in this light, Father Pierson is not only promoting immorality but is taking a heretical position toward one of the seven sacraments of the Church.” Father Bob would disagree as he was careful to differentiate between civil marriages, which are all “outside the Church” and the Church does not recognize anyway and “sacramental” marriages within the Church. Thus, Father Bob would argue that his voting NO on banning same sex “marriage” has nothing to do with Church teaching on sacramental marriage.
I completely agree this priest should be disciplined severely. But will he be? Almost certainly not, and this is the primary reason for our current crisis. Dietrich Von Hildebrand called it the “Lethargy of the Guardians” as far back as the 70’s. We have suffered under the complete unwillingness of ecclesiastical authority since Vatican II to discipline clerics and bishops for egregious sins against doctrine and the faith. What makes it worse is that the same ecclesiastical authority DOES discipline and bring the hammer down for breaking procedural rules/canon laws that have nothing to do with heresy or doctrine. This sets up a practice which lessens the credibility of the bishops who selectively punish lesser offenses while allowing the most egregious publicly scandalous statements from dissenting priests to go unpunished.
I would dare say it is a sin for this man’s bishop or superior not to discipline him in some way, including at minimum, silencing him on this issue to at least minimize further scandal. Will it happen? I’m willing to bet you a shiny nickel it will not. And it is a slap in the face to you and other good priests who would be punished in a second if you did something like deny Holy Communion to a practicing Lesbian Buddhist who introduced you to her “lover” in the sacristy before Mass.
FATHER JOE:
The priest has a track record beyond the video. (I have not directly linked the video, only a strong critique. Those who want to see it can Google the liberal propaganda.)
He recognizes same-sex marriages as valid, both civilly and in the eyes of God. What confuses the issue is that he denies that there has to be concurrence or approbation from the “institutional” Church. I do not have proof, but like some of his Episcopalian liberals, he would love to bless (and maybe has) these unions. He is a regular speaker at gay-lesbian conventions. Remember, too, that priests are only allowed to witness marriages in the U.S. that are also civilly recognized. We function as both civil magistrates and as ministers of the Church. This is not the case in many countries where Catholic couples are required to endure two ceremonies. Such only happens in the U.S. when there is a convalidation.
I should add, that the Church generally recognizes civil marriages between spouses who are not Catholic. If they are legitimately baptized, then there may be a sacramental character as well. Indeed, if there is a divorce and a desire to marry a Catholic, they would have to pursue a formal case annulment with no guarantees of success. Now we will further have to clarify that we do not recognize adulterous marriages or feigned same-sex marriages. I suspect, given the pressure from the Obama administration, that clergy will eventually have to forfeit their civil authority over marriages in order to distinguish the sacramental covenant from the civil legal contract. Once the definition of marriage diverges, we cannot be party to something in which we do not believe. This may already be happening in light of no fault divorce. I would also not be surprised if the government should seek to compel clergy to witness same-sex marriages. The rights of the Church are very much threatened. I pray that our bishops and priests will have the courage to face fines and imprisonment. The latter is quite possible, if the Church’s stand against homosexuality should be judged as a violation of civil rights laws and as hate-speech.
Further, the priest has been involved in the Catholic gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transsexual community. He knows full well the canonical restraints upon Catholics and does not care. All this is to say that the video is deceptive propaganda. He is a liar. Even when he throws out crumbs of feigned respect to Church discipline, they are lies. If you are familiar with his work in Collegeville, then you would know that he also rejects the “proles” (open to human generation) element that is essential to the covenant of marriage. He literally believes that anal intercourse consummates the bond. It is in light of all this that I said that he is a heretic regarding the sacrament of marriage.
In regards to disciplinary measures, they may actually be in the works. Had he been a secular or diocesan priest matters might have been easier. The Benedictines tend to protect their own and have a rather progressive track record in his particular community. One of them (Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB) recently attacked the corrected translation of the Mass at the national Call to Action convention. They also honored the Lesbian Buddhist-Catholic you mentioned and the pro-abortion Catholic Maryland governor was also in attendance. There are a lot of trouble-makers to go around these days.
Orthodox and traditional churchmen have a higher capacity for suffering in that they love the Church and seek to be obedient while the other side really does not care; liberal breakaway groups, as with Archbishop Milingo and Washington’s own Father George Stallings, were also censured and even faced excommunication. In this sense, there is some parallel. I suspect that many in the Church find the contemporary situation almost overwhelming given the pervasive dissent. During this silent and not so silent schism, there is also the worry that the wrong action might lead the ignorant or weak of faith out of the Church. You are right, not all shepherds are to be trusted. But we must also be careful NOT to spread calumny and to hurt good men who are doing their best.
Pope Benedict XVI seems to be hoping that attrition and orthodox replacements among the clergy might hold the answer. My worry is that he, himself, is not a young man. I have found an almost uncharitable delight in how Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, the new Ordinary for San Francisco is making the gay establishment squirm and fret. They were pouting the other day because he outlawed drag queens at fundraisers! Really?
Again, do not be fooled. He might say that “…for committed, same-sex couples is not the Sacrament of Matrimony,” but he really does see it as analogous. Remember, sexual activity outside of marriage is a mortal sin. There is nothing equivalent to it. As a priest he knows this. He is talking out of both sides of his mouth. The Bishops are right on this one. So-called same-sex marriages are indeed a threat to the genuine covenant of marriage, natural or sacramental. There is no loop-hole or escape clause that would allow Catholics to support institutional sodomy.
STEPHEN:
Thanks for the background. In this video he seems to take the stance of…”who cares what the state of MN deems as ‘marriage’ since the Church only recognizes sacramental marriages anyway?” He argues the flip side of religious freedom by stating that the Church should not dictate to the state how it defines “marriage” as civil and Church marriages are separate entities and (in his mind) serve different purposes.
FATHER JOE:
The secular sphere in the public forum would not appreciate marriage as a sacrament. Rather, the point of intersection between the Church and state is the traditional view of marriage as a “natural bond.” The growing division between the Church’s view of marriage, as well as that of natural law, is the reason why someone like Bai Macfarlane has campaigned heavily for traditional marriage and against no fault divorce. Some of her supporters would claim that the conflict or opposition between the civil and ecclesial view of marriage has reached a breaking point, in both the heterosexual orientation and its permanence. They argue that clergy should opt out entirely from working within the system. They suggest that the priest who witnesses any marriage for the state has corrupted (by association) the Catholic understanding. This argument becomes even more defensible if society should formally equate same-sex unions with heterosexual marriages. While priests will not officiate at the feigned marriages of homosexuals and lesbians; will the truth be compromised by our continuing partnership with government in witnessing marriages and signing civil licenses? But what is the alternative? Priests in Europe and Asia often find that in the dual ceremony-system, couples tend to cohabitate if there is any extended duration between the vows before a judge and those before a priest.
The priest errs seriously, by his own admission, for failing to fault the homosexual lifestyle as sinful. Indeed, he seems to praise and to encourage the commission of evil. People of the same gender can be friends but they cannot be spouses. A legal fiction will not make it so.
This is the home of the AWALT PAPERS, the posting of various pieces of wisdom salvaged from the writings, teachings and sermons of the late Msgr. William J. Awalt.
Blogger Priest 