• Our Blogger

    Fr. Joseph Jenkins

  • 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.

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

    Barbara King's avatarBarbara King on Ask a Priest
    Ben Kirk's avatarBen Kirk on Ask a Priest
    Jeremy Kok's avatarJeremy Kok on Ask a Priest
    Barbara's avatarBarbara on Ask a Priest
    forsamuraimarket's avatarforsamuraimarket on Ask a Priest

Faith & Values in the News

Europe’s Churches Becoming Mosques

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.

Filipino Bishop Denounces UN Recommendation to Legalize Prostitution

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.

Obama draws praise from Chavez, Putin — and Castro family

Huh?  With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Pope names seven new saints, seeks to revive faith

Saints, saints and more saints!

US ‘too slow’ to act as drone’s cam captured Libya horror

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!

French rescuers help hundreds flee hotels as floods hit Roman Catholic shrine  town of Lourdes

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.

Father dies shielding children from gunman who set home ablaze; boy killed

Heartbreaking story… and yet a powerful witness of fatherhood in the midst of a terrible tragedy.  Still, so very sad.

Bullet tax proposal in hunt for solution to Chicago gun crime

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!

USCCB Responds to Inaccurate Statement of Fact on HHS Mandate Made During Vice Presidential Debate

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.

Inmate tells arrested pro-lifer: ‘Your arrest in the abortion clinic saved my baby’

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.

Priests Break away to Found an “SSPX of the Strict Observance”

Okay, it is time for me to gloat… I told you so, I told you so.

Morning-after pills offered to NYC high school students

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.)

Pakistan official offers $100,000 reward for killing of maker of anti-Prophet Muhammad film

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.

The Goatman of Prince George’s County

Given that it is October, here is a post re-edited for the Halloween season. It is done somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

The Mythical Half-Man, Half-Animal

The ancient Greeks loved such stories of centaurs (half-man, half horse) and the minotaurs (half-man, half bull).  Possibly akin to the mischevious Pan, the local folklore of Prince George’s County, Maryland, gives us the notorious Goatman.  There is very little information, reliable or otherwise, about this peculiar legend. Scattered newspaper accounts, an article in Strange Magazine, and a couple of citations in books about monsters by Daniel Cohen pretty much exhausts the available data. While creatures like Big Foot, the Loch Ness Monster and even the New Jersey Devil get regular sensational attention, the Goatman of Prince George’s County alternately faces neglect or outright mockery.  It is hard not to regard the business as a joke and yet a number of people over the years placed some credence in the stories.  Admittedly, it seems pretty preposterous.  Complicating the equation is that there are recent sightings of a similar Goatman in Texas.

What is the Legend?

Often the Goatman of Prince George’s County is associated with all the various other so-called “lover’s lane” monsters; attacking the parked cars of teenagers doing more than talking about the weather. However, encounters with this creature have included people of all ages and during the most innocent of situations. It is reported that he has banged upon automobiles and that people have set their dogs upon him, the latter purportedly with the most tragic of results. He appears exclusively near wooded and rural areas and at night. Searches find nothing other than deer.  The mythical elements are quite peculiar and strike fear into the hearts of God-fearing Christians: this satyr-like creature, not unlike the Hellenic deity Pan, is usually described as being human from the waist up and like a goat from the legs down.  As with so many creatures of Cryptozoology, we might find the depictions of artists, but no solid evidence.  Photographs are blurry.  There is no absolute agreement to the appearance of the Goatman.  While it is said by some that he wears boots, others contend that his feet are actually cloven hooves.  Certain tellers of the tale contend that he has devilish twisting horns or antlers. Other renditions would say that his face is goat-like.  The popular story about his origin seems rather farfetched. It is said that he was a researcher at a local agricultural research facility who suffered a metamorphosis when an experiment went awry. Now he travels as an outcast to humanity, some say with an ax in hand.  His stature grows larger with each telling.  Traditionally he was no bigger than a normal man.  Now he is compared to Bigfoot and is given gigantic proportions.  I suspect if an eight to twelve foot monster were running around Maryland, it would be pretty hard to hide.  Today I am the pastor of Holy Family Parish in Mitchellville, MD.  I am smack dab in the Goatman’s old hunting grounds.  But the woods and farms are gone.  New housing in the $500,000 to the $2,000,000 price range has gone up.  It find it doubtful that I will see the Goatman driving down the highway in a Mercedes-Benz.

Suckers for a Good Story and Our Love of the Tall-Tale

One of my favorite authors was Mark Twain.  He was the master of tall-tales and delighted in telling them.  I am also reminded of P. T. Barnum who tried to profit from bringing the sensation and/or mythical to life.  While it is true that many people are gullible, others are attracted to the imaginative elements themselves.  Note how science fiction and fantasy books have exploded at the same time while technology surrounds us and scientific knowledge is growing with leaps and bounds.  We have seen this also in Catholic or Christian circles, with the fans of Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings and C. S. Lewis’ Narnia stories.  We know it is fiction, but it fascinates all the same.  Of course, the danger is that both faith and real science might not be taken seriously.  When the Discovery Channel tried to market their religious programs, pastors said no because they had polluted themselves with shoddy programs about topics like the so-called tomb of Jesus and the search for Noah’s ark.  How credible are hard science programs and solid historical documentaries when they are placed side-by-side with so-called investigative reports on Big Foot and UFO’s?  Real researchers constantly shake their heads and worry about how simple minds could be led astray, just to make profitable television.  The line between fact and fiction is blurred.

In any case, there is a huge emerging market for the paranormal as with Ghost Hunting and renewed interest in mythical creatures like the Mothman, the Bunny Man, the New Jersey Devil, Lizard Man, etc.  People love a mystery and they want the emotions stirred.  We might find some of these funny or alternately, very frightening.  As with rollercoasters, people often like a thrill or scare, especially if they can ironically feel safe during the experience.  As we approach Halloween, note the numbers of Haunted Hayrides and charity Haunted Houses.   There is also the current Zombie craze on college campuses.  Instead of being repelled, it seems the stranger, the better.

Last year I saw a short program where self-proclaimed researchers visited the Colchester Overpass in Clifton, Virginia.  This was the apparent haunted spot where the Bunny Man makes his presence felt.  Supposedly the legend started with a man in a bunny suit who went on a murderous rampage with an axe.  In truth there were a couple on incidents of a man in a bunny suit who threatened couples in 1970 in various locations of Virginia but no one was mutilated.  But the stories began to spread like wildfire.  Stories about the identity of the Bunny Man were demonstrably false, particularly that he was an escapee from a local insane asylum.  No such place existed in the area.  The most that can be said is someone reported a strange man for eating another’s pet cat.

Just as the witnesses of aliens from outer space often come across as sincere; those who testify to encounters with the Goatman also seem to believe that they have seen the legendary creature.  Supporters will argue, “Why would they lie?” and explain that “There is nothing in it for them.”  It has always surprised me that no one in Prince George’s County has tried to market this fascination with Goatman Hunting and selling plastic Goatman dolls.  Hum, I wonder if that would go over as a parish fundraiser?

What About This Goat Business?

Was he a real mutation of a goat and a man?  The idea of a mad scientist who has somehow infected and metamorphosed himself through experiments with goats at the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center is pretty far-fetched.  It would make for a good B-movie but pretty poor science.  Unless he had suffered some kind of natural mutation, as one might from the womb, I would doubt it. Reason rebels at the notion that any faulty pre-DNA technology brought about this monstrosity.  Catastrophic and artificially induced changes into a person’s biology are probably detrimental to health and lethal.  Maryland folklore, about the Goatman and similar legends, has been collected by Barry Lee Pearson at the University of Maryland.  Just as with the New Jersey Devil, he explains that such tales were perpetuated by excited teenagers.  It is here where we find the ingredients for the story:  a mysterious man, hysterical teenagers and too amny Incredble Hulk comic books.  Note that there is no record of a missing researcher and no name is put forward, although some have recently labeled him Doctor Fletcher after the local road where there were purported sitings in Bowie, MD.

The imagination of teens probably ran wild when they encountered a hermit or assorted figures with similar descriptions.  While I was gullible enough to believe anything as a child, when I got older it seem more likely that this was a poor man living outdoors and/or trying to keep his privacy and not liking others to make fun of him.  Given the darkness of the old roads like Brown Station and Fletcher, he was probably more vulnerable on foot than the teens in automobiles.  Kids can be cruel and I can easily imagine an old man fighting for his dignity.   If he lived in the woods, then an axe would be an essential tool.  Even if he did attack cars with an axe, I would not be surprised if he was incited by the lights and mockery.

Such figures often carry a stick to help with the walking and to fend off attackers, both animal and human.  As I write this now, I know a man who has built a structure, part shack and part tent, in the woods near a warehouse in the Forestville area.  During the day he walks up and down Pennsylvania Avenue, Forestville Road, and Allentown Road raising a bible over his head for all to see.  When it rains he keeps the book in plastic and continues his rounds all the same.  The poor man is not quite right, but he means well and believes.  Parishioners of my old church in Forestville helped him with a tent and got him a nice sleeping bag.  He refused proper shelter or further help.  The authorities will not lift a finger to assist him.  They argue that their resources are already stretched to the breaking point.  The shelters are often full and they turn people away.

The Goatman figure, by contrast, traveled mostly by night and fled association with others, at least the so-called regular people.  Hobos who will share a fire or hitch a ride along with other bums of the road are less likely to mingle with so-called regular people.  This reaction is mutual as well.  I saw something of this in my city ministry.  People would cross the street so as to avoid a beggar.  I was counseled to keep my distance from them because they were dirty, smelly, diseased and carried fleas and body lice.  I remember one poor man being chased out of a fast-food restaurant.  He had a dime and asked for water.  I intervened and bought him several large cheeseburgers and super-sized fries.  The manager was upset with me but my money was good.  The poor man told me the honest truth, that it was booze that brought him to this dire state.  He said he would sneak around the dumpsters at night (hoping they were not locked) and would dine on what was thrown away.  I rather think that this urban street person was the city version of his country compatriot, the hermit (plural or singular) labeled as the Goatman.

The county was once a farming community. Small farms often raised goats for their milk, cheese, and meat. They were even utilized as natural lawn mowers. Some people domesticated them like pets, although dogs were unlikely to get along well with them– there is a definite goat smell. Goat skins could be used as a poor man’s leather and as a coat. Wearing the skins of an animal, with the accompanying cap of horns or antlers, was seen as a way for the men of the forest to get close to wild prey, like deer. Wild goats, to my knowledge, no longer roam the county.

One elderly person remarked that they had known the figure, not as the Goatman, but as the Coatman. The name changed as the particulars were confused by word of mouth. According to this testimony, it resulted from this madman always wearing a long coat of fur, even in the sweltering summers of Southern Maryland.

Current Testimony

While the sensational media will sometimes mention the Goatman, only a remnant of the local community has a real interest.   Goatman Hollow, a seasonal “haunted” attraction, did NOT open in 2012.  The skeptical will say the Goatman saga is corny or stupid; the gullible, that it has something to do with alien abductions. Nevertheless, a few still have fun with the traditional story. Asking around, a young woman in her twenties told me that she has heard of the Goatman living under Cry Baby Bridge in Brandywine. Previously, I had heard rumblings of such a character around Baby Lane, near Mill Swamp, a waterway running into Pomokey Creek. Actually, if he were to live anywhere in the county, that would be the place. It still has a remnant of the rural about it and is adjacent to the countryside of neighboring Charles County. The Pomokey Creek area has many poor people. I know of one family who resides there in a shack with wooden crates for a floor and blankets for room dividers. They make a little money selling wood and eat what they can catch. They have no electricity or indoor plumbing. Hidden away on a dirt road in Pomokey, they are the forgotten residents of the county. Their local minister is an anti-Catholic preacher who earned his theological credentials from an uncertified correspondence course. Ignorance and resentment, as well as children robbed of hope, is still liberally bred. Their overriding pride and deep distrust of strangers makes it difficult to help them. (The importance of such an environment near a creek will come to light in my comments about the Upper Marlboro Goatman.)

Personal Recollections as a Child in Forestville-District Heights, MD

I well recall the “Goat Man” phenomenon of my childhood. While I can nostalgically reminisce upon this “creature” from the 1960’s and early 1970’s, at the time it filled me with much anxiety. It took upon itself something of the pallor of a boogeyman, a mysterious figure who might “get us” if we were bad. Such was the message that many parents gave their children. The teenage couples were all excited about this “thing” in the woods, I suppose hoping that a tale of mystery and danger might help their parents forget why they were in the woods, anyway. (As for those in parked cars, they evidently used to agitate the Goatman by flashing their lights upon him. His response was to attack the automobiles.) Did the grownups, themselves, really believe in the existence of this “monster”?

Local teens used to tease us small children about the Goatman.  They said that if we followed them into the woods the Goatman would get us.  In retrospect, they might not have wanted us little ones tagging along.  I do recall at one point that some of the parents and other adults thought there was something strange in the forest, going so far as to hunt it down. However, this task was often relegated to teenage boys playing a new version of snipe hunting. Did the adults merely adopt the fanciful stories as a tool to compel their younger ones to behave?  The wooded area in Forestville, a name once descriptive of the town, was being developed for suburban housing. An untouched area behind Holly Hills apartments was said to possess a Goatman. But, as I said, the kids might have merely adopted the Bowie/Upper Marlboro story for their own.  Officials of the neighborhood schools, Forestville Elementary and Spalding Junior High, as well as fearful parents, were always harping at us to keep out of the woods, lest some creature should get us.  As any student of human nature might guess, this warning made the prospect more tempting. Indeed, as a shortcut, so many kids had detoured through the woods on the way home after school, that a trail of a sorts had been made.  Remembering the story of Hansel and Gretel, I felt so very brave when I first dared to misbehave and entered the forested trail.  What I remember comes to me through the prism of a child’s mind and feelings. Maybe I made more of the Goatman story than I should have?  Given that various friends have forgotten about it, it seems that fear and wonder overly fueled my wild imagination.

As a child, I connected the myth of the Goatman with a mysterious figure who came to the Forestville area.  He was pursued by the local authorities.  The county was in the early stages of a transition wherein unchecked construction of homes, businesses, and roads were encroaching upon the natural environment. (The rural and farm community of only a few decades ago is almost extinguished, now. Prince George’s has become one of the most populous counties in the nation, with all the accompanying regulations, taxes, and laws to match.)  A vagabond living off the land and/or a creature like the Goatman would be hard pressed to find a home here.  Looking back, it seemed that the interloper was an intensely shy individual. Was he ashamed of his appearance? Or, did he just want to be left alone? He would creep from the woods at night scavenging for food, clothing, and any other useful castaways. The Junior High dumpster was repeatedly broken into, as were those behind Penn-Mar Shopping Center. The proximity of these vagabond treasure troves might have been another reason for this wanderer’s presence in our location. Stories spread of mutilated animals. Dogs were purportedly dismembered, and sometimes with the meatiest parts missing. I suspect he defended himself against the dogs and then made sure the food did not go to waste.  Pets protecting their owners’ property and bands of wild canines were known to go after him. While there were allegations that he ate raw flesh; there were definite signs of camp fires in the woods. Eventually, some stumbled upon his home, little more than a rackety tree house surrounded by animal skins and bones. The teens lost no time getting out of there. While in Junior High School, officials were forced by parents to search the small forest for the Goatman. Since, as far as I knew, he never hurt or killed anyone, they were going to charge him with trespassing. Word was that they found an old hermit who quickly eluded their grasp.

Those woods are almost totally gone now, replaced by houses and condominiums. If he was old then, he must assuredly be dead now. Of course, there is a possibility that he was not the only one given the Goatman label. The bums and hobos, while being solitary, would sometimes gather for purposes of sharing stories and trade. This became even more the case as they were less welcomed into what we consider normal society.

Various youth with whom I grew up have no recollection of any of this.  One even accused me of making it all up.  Maybe so many have forgotten the tale because they WANT TO FORGET? Just as stories can be exaggerated or molded into legend or myth, they can also be repressed. Being scared by a boogeyman is one thing, actually believing in him, or worse, meeting up with him, is something else!

Upper Marlboro, County Seat: Source of the Goatman?

An article by Mark Opsasnick in Strange Magazine mentions that the Goatman stories “originated with farm families in early 1958 around the Upper Marlboro area of what today is Rt. 202 or Landover Road.” Back in the 1990’s, I thought I would make some cursory exploration of the oldest testimonies about the so-called Goatman among the members of St. Mary of the Assumption Church in Upper Marlboro, a Catholic community finding its origins in colonial times. The likelihood was that such a creature-man would have emerged from and have been known best by the poorer inhabitants. I turned my search in that direction. Maybe their descendants would have some notion about the oddity’s identity? Many of the black slaves and early tenant workers were parishioners there. After the Civil War, while there were some influential parish families among the property owners, many of the poor made this church their own. Immediately, it struck me as curious that Upper Marlboro seemed at the center of the various sightings:

Fletchertown Road in Old Bowie
[Due north of UM] It was once heavily forested with Northridge Community Park still remaining. Newstop and Horsepen streams are near and branch out from the Patuxent River.

Lottsford Road in Mitchelleville
[Northwest of UM] On the other side of Watkins Regional Park from us, it includes the remnant forest, Western Branch Stream Valley Park and several golf courses. It is intersected by Bald Hill and Western branches on one side and Southwest branch from the Patuxent on the other.

National Agricultural Research Center in Beltsville
[Northwest of UM] This is still a somewhat rural and farming area, with a stream running into Indian Creek It encloses Alter Pond, Beaverdam Creek, Indian Creek, Little Paint Branch Stream out of Little Paint Branch Park, etc. Adjacent is the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

Patuxent Wildlife Research Center in Laurel
[Northwest of UM] A portion of the Patuxent River actually flows through here. It remains a substantial natural wilderness.

Walker Mill Road/Forestville-Ritchie Road
[West of UM] One could follow the Southwest Branch stream right into this area. It includes Walker Mill Regional Park and on the other side, near Forestville proper, the Suitland Bog Conservation Area and stream.

Tucker Road in Clinton
[Southwest of UM] Henson Creek can be followed into Henson Stream Valley Park.

Brown Station Road in Upper Marlboro
[Immediate area] An assortment of farms and woods dot the landscape. Cabin, Back, Turkey, and other branch streams intersect it. It is not far from Rt. 202 (Largo Road), Southwest Stream Valley Park, and Watkins Regional Park.

Note that all of these areas still have at least some residual rural flavor, usually reduced to a park, and that in past days, were accessible by a waterway. Upper Marlboro is a place of convergence for many streams and canals. These particulars are important as they help to collaborate some of the history about the man or men behind the Goatman legend uncovered in Upper Marlboro.

One of the parishioners of St. Mary’s recalls a man named Dominic But— whom he thinks was the source of these Goatman stories. He lived on Leeland Road, an area still quite rural and housing many rustic characters. He would close up his house from Spring to Fall and go trapping for turtles. Principally, he would look what the kids call the crocodile turtle. Cooters, Painted and Bog turtles are found in or near water.  We all know about the terrapin.  The creature he sought was a large or monstrous water turtle, with ridges along its tail. The beast looks something like a dragon with a shell on its back. They can also grow quite large, as much as 15 to 25 pounds. I myself have seen them in School House Pond down the street from the church. Man-made canals, creeks, and streams crisscross the Upper Marlboro area, feeding into the Patuxent River. Water levels sometimes flood the local bridges. Patuxent Park River is also a feature of the area within parish boundaries. The turtle population, no longer actively pursued, has become a nuisance to local fishermen, snaring their lines. Dominic would have followed these waterways in search of turtles. Indeed, the Collington and East branches (streams) passed near his home. He tended to move westward to find turtles, perhaps because the water was murkier in that direction– the kind the turtles liked best. He would also go quite a way south, but as he got older, his treks shortened. Along the muddy banks the turtles would bury their eggs.

He was quite a character. Most certainly he wore some sort of head-dressing as protection against the elements. Nature could have easily provided the horns for a cap. Of course, all sorts of head-gear could have been mistaken for something bizarre in the cover of darkness. During the time he was out, he would live totally off the land. He wore furs and carried other gear on his person. He would not cut his hair, which grew quite long. Because of the dirt and hair, you would be hard-pressed to testify to his African American ancestry. He was a trader. While he traveled, he would occasionally ask permission to stay in barns. Knowing how his appearance was offensive, he never asked to enter a house. While he probably carried a hatchet, if not a complete ax, it is known that he carried a long stick with a nail at one end. This was his most valuable tool. He would use it to probe for turtles in the muddy water. He could determine from the bubbles which side was the head and which was the tail. The last thing anyone ever wanted to do was to reach for one of these creatures on the head side. Their mouths are very powerful and dangerous. He was known to reach into the mud past his shoulder to drag the heaviest of turtles out of the water. He would then take the turtle and trade for things he needed. If someone wanted him to prepare the turtle, he would gut it as one might do a fish. As one who has eaten turtle, I can testify that the meat is quite good; however, the process of extracting it from the shell is a bit gross. Because of its primitive nervous system, the turtle can run around without its head and the heart will continue beating for a while after it has been detached from the rest of the reptilian flesh. As a boy, I can remember my mother with an ax, chopping the head off a turtle. Then my brothers and I had to chase the headless body as it sought to get away. Yum yum!

You can well imagine what this hairy man, dressed strangely, and caked in mud must have looked like. He functioned this way faithfully from the 1930’s to the mid-1950’s. After the war, people began to settle in the county who were more circumspect about trespassers and unfamiliar with the ways of men like Dominic. They went into a panic when they saw him and unleashed their dogs upon him. The civility he and his kind knew had been replaced by a fear and loathing– the ultimate in bad manners and intolerance. The last thing they wanted was to trade with this man trespassing on their property with a bucket or inverted shell full of turtle guts. They probably did not give him time to explain what he was offering. Confrontations became so bad that he was reduced to traveling public roads at night. That is where the teenagers come into the picture.

His family line, still found locally, has sometimes suffered from skin diseases which rob the features of pigment. There may even have been some albinism. It is a major presumption, but if such were the case for Dominic, then much would be explained regarding glimpses of a milky complection and the care he took to avoid direct exposure to the sun. Further, the legendary red eyes would find a logical explanation since this is the natural appearance of eyes lacking pigmentation.

I am told that one of his favorite areas to work was down on Brandywine Road, a place where his family and compatriots purportedly continued their line of work for many years. Particularly, the area was in the direction of Baden in what is today Cedarville State Park. It still allows hunting within designated areas. Several waterways penetrate this forest, but Dominic preferred Zekiah Swamp Run. If I wanted to find a modern day Goatman, that is where I would start my search. Who knows, maybe they still carry goats with them for milk and cheese? After all, it is a lot easier than toting a cow through the brush and mud. Plus, it will eat anything.

There were similar persons often confused with Dominic and who may have lived a parallel type of life. One was named Joe Car—. Another was George Tay—. The last in this list refused to cut his hair and would wear a long green army surplus jacket. He wore this coat even during the humid hot summers. I am told he would bring an alarm clock to Mass and would make a racket if the pastor went too long. People laughed about it and tolerated him. Such people made life interesting. Maybe that is why the legend of the Goatman has endured? This feeble reflection does not exhaust the mystery. That is probably for the best.

“Last known victim of the Goat Man.”–just joking!

Postscript: Who Are the “Real” Goatmen?

My faith mandates that I make a qualification to these remarks. I would argue that such creatures do exist and that they are truly monsters of the worse possible sort. They are not restricted to Prince George’s County; indeed, they co-exist with us as a secret society. These goatmen, and I must quicken to add, goatwomen, do not possess horns– at least none that we can see– but still they are kin to Satan. Unlike the local fables, they are not the end-product of either science or nature, but of supernature. They constitute that other city which has been repudiated throughout the centuries and most brilliantly discussed by St. Augustine of Hippo. It is a legion which lies to itself and to all others. Their allegiance is only to themselves, and then only when it is profitable and/or pleasurable. They have no immediate concern for judgments against them, but are a parasitical hedonistic community enraptured by proximate goods and ends. Unlike the poor old men who were harassed for their peculiarities, and who were really a threat to no one; these other goatpeople are all murderers. True to the mythic symbolism of the horned goat, they are the ultimate manipulators. Well-versed with pretense, they have stifled genuine charity both in their hearts and in their daily operation. They become more and more beasts, and less and less human. Compounding the problem, they are all plagued carriers of a lethal contagion called sin– a poison which if left untreated, results in the death of souls.

“But when the Son of Man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory; and before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the GOATS; and he will set the sheep on his right hand, but the GOATS on the left.“Then the king will say to those on his right hand, ‘Come, blessed of my Father, take possession of the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger and you took me in; naked and you covered me; sick and you visited me; I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the just will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry, and feed thee; or thirsty, and give thee drink? And when did we see thee a stranger, and take thee in; or naked, and clothe thee? Or when did we see thee sick, or in prison, and come to thee?’ And answering the king will say to them, ‘Amen I say to you, as long as you did it for one of these, the least of my brethren, you did it for me.’“Then he will say to those (GOATS) on his left hand, ‘Depart from me, accursed ones, into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry, and you did not give me to eat; I was thirsty and you gave me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take me in; naked, and you did not clothe me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister to thee? Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Amen I say to you, as long as you did not do it for one of these least ones, you did not do it for me.’ And these will go into everlasting punishment, but the just into everlasting life.” (Matthew 25:31-46)

A Revision of the Challoner-Rheims Version, 1943 Confraternity of Christian Doctrine

Other Goatman Sites

Goatman Drawings – Artists’ rendering of the mythical creature.

Goatman Legend – A brief explanation of the mythical creature.

Goatman Legend in Washington City Paper – A newspaper article placed online.

Famed Goatman in Washington Post – Big time article for the goatman.

Recommended: Strange Magazine Issue #14, Fall 1994, pp. 18-21. Author: Mark Opsasnick. ISSN 0894-8968.

Written April 2, 1998 / Revised October 17, 2012

Was Peter, the First Pope, Married?

peter333QUESTION:

You claim that Peter was the first Pope, and yet Scripture attests that he was married. Since this great apostle could be married, why not all bishops and priests?

RESPONSE:

Restricting ourselves to the Gospels, no doubt you are referring to Peter’s mother-in-law. We read in Luke 4:38-39: “After he left the synagogue, he entered the house of Simon. Simon’s mother-in-law was afflicted with a severe fever, and they interceded with him about her. He stood over her, rebuked the fever, and it left her. She got up immediately and waited on them.” See the story again in Mark 1:30.

The Catholic Church does not deny that Peter was married. However, note her general absence in the New Testament texts. We do not even know her name. We only encounter the mother-in-law, never his wife or any children. Indeed, throughout the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, references are made to Peter’s activities and travels; but, only a vague intimation by Paul in 1 Cor. 9:5 that he had a right to travel with his “believing wife.” If it were not for this mention in the epistle, one might suppose that Peter was a widower. Tradition suggests that his wife was martyred. It is peculiar that although the wife would ordinarily have cared for the needs of guests, Peter had to rely upon his wife’s mother.

However, granting that she was still around (somewhere); she evidently assumed a secondary role in his life behind his leadership of the infant Church. Indeed, her insignificance in the biblical witness would seem to provide weight to the supporters of priestly celibacy. Like Peter, bishops and priests might do better to serve God’s people without the distraction of wives and children. Jesus gives his sheep to Peter. Pastors similarly love Christ and care for their flocks. This is the emphasis of Catholic ministry, our family in faith.

This post was never meant to be a defamation against Peter’s wife.  I have also edited it to avoid any peripheral discussion about whether or not the tradition can be trusted regarding her martyrdom; given that some authorities speculated that she might have died earlier and/or that there might have been a second bond.  It is probably best that we accept the tradition at face value.

Here are early testimonies for the martyrdom of Peter’s wife:

CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA (died around 215 AD)

(THE STROMATA, 7:11)

So then he undergoes toils, and trials, and afflictions, not as those among the philosophers who are endowed with manliness, in the hope of present troubles ceasing, and of sharing again in what is pleasant; but knowledge has inspired him with the firmest persuasion of receiving the hopes of the future.

Wherefore he contemns not alone the pains of this world, but all its pleasures.
They say, accordingly, that the blessed Peter, on seeing his wife led to death, rejoiced on account of her call and conveyance home, and called very encouragingly and comfortingly, addressing her by name, Remember the Lord. Such was the marriage of the blessed and their perfect disposition towards those dearest to them.

Thus also the apostle says, that he who marries should be as though he married not, and deem his marriage free of inordinate affection, and inseparable from love to the Lord; to which the true husband exhorted his wife to cling on her departure out of this life to the Lord.

Was not then faith in the hope after death conspicuous in the case of those who gave thanks to God even in the very extremities of their punishments? For firm, in my opinion, was the faith they possessed, which was followed by works of faith.

EUSEBIUS (around 265 AD to 340 AD)

(ECCLESIAL HISTORY, 3:30)

1. Clement, indeed, whose words we have just quoted, after the above-mentioned facts gives a statement, on account of those who rejected marriage, of the apostles that had wives. Or will they, says he, reject even the apostles? For Peter and Philip begot children; and Philip also gave his daughters in marriage. And Paul does not hesitate, in one of his epistles, to greet his wife, whom he did not take about with him, that he might not be inconvenienced in his ministry.

2. And since we have mentioned this subject it is not improper to subjoin another account which is given by the same author and which is worth reading. In the seventh book of his Stromata he writes as follows: They say, accordingly, that when the blessed Peter saw his own wife led out to die, he rejoiced because of her summons and her return home, and called to her very encouragingly and comfortingly, addressing her by name, and saying, ‘Remember the Lord.’ Such was the marriage of the blessed, and their perfect disposition toward those dearest to them. This account being in keeping with the subject in hand, I have related here in its proper place.

DISCUSSION

GERRY:

Thanks for all your insights, Fr. Joe. They are priceless! I’d like to let you know that I look forward to reading the “feeds” from your blog site. God Bless!

KARL:

Who would sit in judgment for all the annulments? Certainly the Pope does not have the time and men who cannot keep their houses in order (like those divorced and seeking annulments) certainly should not sit in judgment of each other and their wives.

What would happen to a bishop who abandoned his wife? Should he continue to serve as a bishop? Who would pay for the divorce, alimony and child support settlements? Who would get the Cathedral, the wife?

Anyone who thinks it is wise to have a married clergy is likely naive, foolish or has difficulty keeping their mind off their private parts. Oops, or Orthodox or one of the Uniate Rites.

ALEXANDER ROMAN:  As a Ukrainian Catholic, I wanted to take great exception to a comment on that refers to Eastern Catholics as “uniates.” That term is pejorative and offensive – that it is used by a Latin Rite Catholic is not helpful.

FATHER JOE:

Churches of the East do not permit dating priests. They have to be married before ordination. Only single men become bishops. There is a different sense of priesthood between those who are celibate and the ones who are married. The first married Episcopalian priest in the U.S. who became a Catholic priest is now divorced. His wife left him, saying that nothing in the Episcopal church prepared them for what his life would be like. She gave him an ultimatum, leave the Catholic priesthood or she would leave him. He is now a divorced and celibate priest.

CATHOLIC GIRL:

Catholics and Protestants arguing for a married Priesthood (or worse those who propose that Mary was not a perpetual Virgin) miss the point with their literal interpretations.

Catholics are not literalists (although most Protestants are). We hold the Bible as no more or less important as Church tradition and teaching. Remember who put the Bible together – the Catholic Church. Who better to understand and interpret the meaning?

The important part of the message about St. Peter is that he – Peter – represents the Church. Christ was returning to the Father and so he gave Peter a duty as the first Pope and left us with the Church as the visible symbol of his love. He specifically said that he would be with the Church until the end of time and gave it the “keys to heaven,” what they bind on Earth is bound in Heaven.

He knew Peter was not perfect – after all, he denied he knew Christ three times. He did expect and continues to expect that we follow him and that means that unmarried persons should remain celibate – as he did.

Only the Catholic Church has the keys to the kingdom. Pope Benedict says that the tradition will not be changed. The Church isn’t a democracy and those that don’t agree are simply not Catholic. So he’s the boss and that discussion is closed!

MARK:

The Church has never taught the two sacraments are incompatible; neither did Our Lord. That the Church has chosen to promote celibacy in the model of Christ should be sufficient for the discussion.

“In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.”—St Augustine

FATHER JOE:

It is probable that his wife later suffered martyrdom but her absence from the Scripture texts is still a significant fact. Except for the fact that Peter had the right to bring her along, there is little or nothing that can be cited to show that his wife actually did participate in his most important missionary journeys.

You are right that the sacrament of marriage and that of holy orders are not intrinsically incompatible with each other; although, there is early evidence of tension. Many of the Popes and saints over the centuries have written about celibacy in the priesthood and religious life as if it were the best course to pursue. Could it be said that just as there was an organic development of doctrine, that celibacy for priests reflects a positive evolution in discipline as well, also under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? I think so. Indeed, there is growing evidence that priests who were married during the apostolic and patristic age were expected to practice perpetual continence after ordination.

ANGELA:

I personally believe that leaders of the church should be able to get married if they want; but I think it is great when they are capable of remaining celibate. I guess I feel if God has called you to become a priest, then he has also called you to become celibate since that is in accordance to what priesthood is.

I no longer attend a Catholic church, although I grew up in one. I have met some great priests and some not so great. I have also met some great married pastors and some not so great. It does talk about how it is better for a man to remain celibate unless you are incapable. I believe if a man can do this successfully he will be greatly rewarded.

Unfortunately, if a man is choosing to go into the priesthood and have lust issues, they may want to consider what going into the priesthood really means. He should either first address such issues or consider the possibility that maybe God wants him to be a leader of men in a different way that allows marriage. He should not necessarily change denominations if he feels his faith corresponds more greatly with Catholic belief systems; but there are so many ways to be a shepherd among men and yet be married.

That being said, I still admire the man and woman who can devote their hearts, minds, and souls solely to God and remain pure in heart, mind, body and soul.

JAKE:

Peter was a [expletive deleted] and his wife was well to be rid of him. Peter is well said to be the founder of the ‘mother of [expletive deleted] church’. Women were nothing more than cattle in the [expletive deleted] bible and the men, including jayzus were perverted [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted]. The catholic church is indeed the true church of jayzus. If priests aren’t [expletive deleted] each other, they are [expletive deleted] innocent children and being paid by stupid people to do so.

FATHER JOE:

I must report your IP number (Atlanta) to the authorities for misuse of this forum. Sorry, but you forced my hand.

JAKE:

Peter=child molester
jayzus=[deleted pejorative word for homosexuals]
catholic church=mother of [plural expletive deleted]

FATHER JOE:

Jake=Bigot

LUCIA:

It is an interesting topic and one I am not sure I yet fully understand. It is my understanding that the vows of celibacy from the priesthood all the way to the pontiff are a matter of the disciplines of the Church. Its necessity is established by the Authority of the Church based on the inspired judgments of the Church.

Thus it is possible that the Church can change its mind on this point for its own reasons, or make exceptions to the rule. For example I know that in cases of Eastern Catholics, those from the predominantly Orthodox regions which are now in full communion with Rome, there are exceptions allowing married priests. None of this creates a problem.

So to my thinking, if as Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius relate, Peter was in fact married as an apostle/bishop it doesn’t matter. If the Church then later decided that it would require celibacy of priests and all the clergy in the higher ranks as well then that is the rule. The rule established by the authority of the Church. If Peter was not married as a bishop likewise it remains a discipline the Church has established and maintained for good reason. And one which, in limited cases to which it makes exception.

Do I understand correctly? Thanks.

FATHER JOE:

Sounds like you do. Priests promise celibacy when they are ordained transitional deacons.

MD:

Lucia has the simplest answer but the most profound.

CO:

First of all, the Bible refers to Peter’s mother-in-law. My assumption is that there is a wife and the Scriptures do not tell me different…meaning, he was married. My concern, however, is the belief that he was the first Pope. If you are basing it on the fact that Jesus said that on this Rock I will build my church, and he was speaking to Peter, Christ is the Rock, not Peter. Peter in the original Greek is petros, which in interpreted… “pebble.”

FATHER JOE:

Actually, in common usage the word PETROS could mean more than pebble. The reason why that word is used instead of the more common Greek word for ROCK is because Greek words have gender. Peter is given the male version of the word. In itself it is a transliteration of the Aramaic which makes no distinctions about ROCK. Peter is literally a chip off the old block, Jesus Christ, who is the foundation stone of the Catholic Church. Peter is Rock because Jesus is ROCK.

Only God Can Judge Homosexuality #3 (Debate)

A Debate with Fred on Homosexuality

FRED:

We Christians want to avoid sin that offends God. We do not unilaterally harm God but we do wreck our love relationship with Him by sinning. Created in His loving image, we fail to live up to expectations. Without Jesus and His deal to make it all right, we would be planning our new residence in Hell. But we have taken Jesus as Savior and Lord and He keeps us in His Father’s loving will. As Lord, Jesus bases and defines ALL sin as lack of love (Matthew 22:36-40). Such obvious sins as theft, murder and adultery are unloving because each has a victim, someone not receiving love.

FATHER JOE:

Yes, sin is always a violation of love.

FRED:

Please tell me, who is the unloved victim in a homosexual relationship? Neither is a victim, neither is unloved. Where is the hurt? Who could bring suit against the “sinner”? What Gospel writer or Bible prophet claimed homosexuality is sinful? Jesus didn’t. These are not rhetorical questions; they are unanswered by those who refuse God’s grace and live by working the law.

FATHER JOE:

St. Paul’s words cannot be rationalized away. He was the great apostle who spoke about us as living in the freedom of grace that faith brings and not under the yoke of the law. However, he is also the one who exhorts against homosexual activity as a sin that can cost us eternal life. Are you saying that the epistles of St. Paul in the Bible are not God’s inspired Word? The teachings of Christ come through his words and actions and through the witness and message of the Apostles in his living Church.

Your questions are good ones and I will attempt to answer as best I can:

1. Who is the unloved victim in a homosexual relationship?

There are many victims, beginning with Christ who as the saving Lamb of God suffered and died under the weight of all the sins committed or ever to be committed. If we loved Jesus as we should, then we would make a better effort to live a virtuous life in keeping with the commandments. The Jews understood the commandments against sexual immorality as also referring to homosexual misconduct. It was for that reason that they enacted a dire punishment upon those caught. I must also add a corrective. Sometimes sin is not a matter of an “unloved victim” but rather of a person or persons who were not loved enough. True love requires discipline and sacrifice. When I prepare couples for marriage and discover that they are cohabitating and/or fornicating, their response is often that they love each other “too much” to wait. I would not deny that they love each other, but there is something of a lie about what they say and do. If they loved each other as true Christians should, then they should be willing to undergo any difficulty and sacrifice for the beloved. Thus they lie about the depth of their love. The second lie is their relationship, itself. The marital act is a loving act between a husband and wife. Between anyone else it is a fraud and cannot express what God intends for it to convey. Two homosexual men or two lesbian women might have incredible affection for each other. Because of their sexual disorder, this accompanies a passionate interest as well. But sometimes true love does not mean intimate embracing or being together. Sometimes it means walking away and distance. Sexual love is only permitted between spouses in marriage. Unmarried heterosexuals are not entitled to it. Marriage by definition is a covenant or contract between a man and a woman. There is no such thing as same sex-marriage. Thus, people of the same gender may never engage in sexual acts with one another. I know this sounds harsh, but I believe that homosexuality is viewed as an abomination by God. I see no way around the Scriptural testimony or the basic physical mechanics of human nature. Men and women’s parts fit together and they are made for each other. Homosexuality means trying to rewrite the manual, and the end result does not work very well. There is no potential for offspring and the bodies themselves are sometimes harmed. Love does not have to be sexual. If there is no possibility of reversal, I believe homosexuals are called to a generous and prayerful love in the context of the Church and for the larger community. But this love must be chaste and celibate.

2. Where is the hurt?

The hurt comes from a failure to love each other as God intends. One may not immediately become aware of the harm on a subjective level, but it is there. Just as kids who say they are in love take no note of the STD they transmit from one to the other; homosexual couples may only become aware over time of the emotional frustration inherent in feigning legitimate sexual intercourse. Further, there must be a spiritual effect, given that there is an objectively immoral relationship. As for Catholics, the Magisterium of the Church leaves no doubt that homosexual acts are always and everywhere disordered and wrong. The question might be better phrased as, “Who does it hurt?” I hear this all the time from young people who are sexually active. They learn all too soon that it hurts them and that there are serious consequences for sinful behavior. Casual relationships often break off; as for homosexuals, statistics show that the gay pick-up scene is more the rule than the exception. A husband and wife can truly express the two becoming one flesh. Gay sexual activity always leaves the partners somewhat estranged from each other. No matter how much they try, they are never one flesh. This makes infidelity all the easier. The manner by which they parrot the marital act is in itself somewhat abusive and an ugly caricature of the male-female dynamic.

3. Who could bring suit against the “sinner”?

Traditionally I suppose it was society that punished certain sins judged as criminal. The federal government forced the Mormons of Utah to give up plural marriage and up until recent times, sodomy and homosexual activity were illegal in most places. Indeed, cohabitation between men and women was punishable in some states, like Virginia. Many places were so concerned about it that after five years, the legality of common law marriages was imposed. The judgment that most matters, is that of almighty God. Anyone who contends that God would look the other way or favor homosexual unions is fighting two thousand years of tradition. Contemporary revisionism is on pretty shaky ground.

FRED:

It is noteworthy that Gay people employ themselves in loving professions like medicine, education and the ministry. However, some Christians evidently work in the Biblical judicial system.

FATHER JOE:

That is not fair! All Christians should seek to know the mind of God so that they might better please him. God revealed his truths to us for a reason, not so they may be ignored or rationalized away. Many Christian heterosexuals are also in the service ministries, but any denial of the objective moral order represents a false compassion. Homosexuals are urged to be chaste and celibate, not because we are busy-bodies or want to hurt them, but because we love them and want them to do what is right. It is in their interest to be holy and in a right relationship with God and his Church. This relationship has both a personal and a corporate component. We take St. Paul seriously when he says that certain types of conduct can cost us our place in the kingdom of heaven.

FRED:

Certainly if God didn’t want men to have sex with other men, He would have said “Man shall not lie with man PERIOD” (see Leviticus 18:22, 21:13). God wanted Moses to eradicate rampant idolatry in the Jewish nation. That whole “… as with a woman” thing condemns straight men pretending to make it with a woman, such as during idol worship. Paul explains it further when putting down the straight Romans (1:26-28) for “leaving their natural relations” (i.e., as with a woman) and having idolatrous sex with men. Gay men are attracted to other men by definition and by God. They can only imagine what sex “… as with a woman” would be like.

FATHER JOE:

There is some confusion in your words at this point. Fred, you are not being honest with yourself or us. God is abundantly and brutally clear. The issue with the Jews was a lot more complicated than idolatry. Jewish and Christian anthropology will not permit homosexuality. The verdict for such sins in the Old Testament was terrible, either God raining down fire from heaven upon two cities or the stoning to death of those who were exposed. Arguably the ancient Jews were more bloodthirsty than we would care to think about; but penalties aside, homosexuality was never tolerated.

Many in the pagan world (who worshipped false gods or idols) also tolerated homosexuality. We are not to be like the pagans, yesterday or today. Looking at the context that you note from Leviticus, we read:

“You shall not offer any of your offspring to be immolated to Molech, thus profaning the name of your God. I am the LORD. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination. You shall not have carnal relations with an animal, defiling yourself with it; nor shall a woman set herself in front of an animal to mate with it; such things are abhorrent” (Leviticus 18:21-23).

Goodness! The ancient Jews classified the evil of homosexuality as between child sacrifice to demons and sex with animals! Certain elements of the Levitical codes were based upon accidentals and custom. These prohibitions here represent a significant understanding of what makes up the substance of humanity: the sanctity life and value of children as opposed to the barren vulgarity of sodomy and zoophilia.

As for Romans, you are presumptuous in saying that “straight Romans” were condemned for homosexual sex. St. Paul is a Pharisee, he knows the Jewish law. The condemnation here is because some followed their inclination, their homosexual disorientation. By the way, bisexuals stand just as condemned by their conduct as others who violate the natural order and God’s will. Sexual disorientation is viewed by the Church as an effect of Original sin. God did not design men to be so orientated. They are wounded or broken.

Imagine, for a moment Fred that God is speaking to you through St. Paul (Romans 1:18-27):

“The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.”

You are suppressing the truth for what you want to selfishly believe. You worship the creature, the folly of men before the wisdom of God. That which should be clear and evident is made foggy in your mind. Here is further Scriptural testimony (1 Timothy 5-11):

“The aim of this instruction is love from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a sincere faith. Some people have deviated from these and turned to meaningless talk, wanting to be teachers of the law, but without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance. We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law, with the understanding that law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, the unchaste, practicing homosexuals, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.”

Jude 6-7 offers another witness on this matter:

“The angels too, who did not keep to their own domain but deserted their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains, in gloom, for the judgment of the great day. Likewise, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and practiced unnatural vice, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”

FRED:

“Homosexual” was coined about 1865, so any Bible translation since then that uses a form of that word is a lie that needs to be emended. (The King James Version is honest.) It premiered in a1946 English Bible and continues to condemn loving Gays.

FATHER JOE:

Do you prefer the label sodomites? [Given that this biblical term is increasingly viewed as hurtful and offensive, I am weaning myself from using it.]  The word “Gay” is unfortunate. I have met very few happy homosexuals.

FRED:

What is the most love one can show another sinner? Offer them an eternity with God through the redemptive cross of Jesus. Instead of judging them, shouldn’t Christians be telling those “sinful” homosexuals that Jesus died for their sins? The stumbling block is that Gays do not want to affiliate with unloving and judgmental Christians. Know Jesus, know love. No Jesus, no love.

FATHER JOE:

What do you think the Church is trying to do? We want homosexuals to know divine forgiveness and salvation in Christ. However, this requires the admonishment: repent and believe! If we did not love them, we would keep our mouths closed and allow them to continue toward perdition. We speak out because we love and care. Unfortunately, certain homosexuals interpret this as hatred and being mean-spirited. Jesus is both the judge of the world and the lover of souls. He is Divine Justice and Divine Mercy, in person. You focus upon his mercy but neglect his justice. The problem is not that homosexuals “do not want to affiliate with unloving and judgmental Christians,” but rather, that they are resisting conversion and hard obedience, as well as those Christians who love them too much not to tell them the truth. Homosexual acts are wrong. God does not approve. Embrace purity and platonic friendships.

Discussion

TASTI:

Self-righteousness, however packaged, using scriptures to legislate your brand of religious morality against a group of people in a democratic society is simply reflective of the same kind of intolerance that goes back ages. Scriptures have been used to justify racism, hate and all kinds of acts against mankind in the name of God. Thankfully, there are those within the Catholic and Christian community who don’t share this same kind of narrow perspective. The fight for civil rights for the LGBT community will continue and will eventually win.

FATHER JOE:

Who is self-righteous? I quoted Scripture and the universal catechism. Your problem is not with me but with God and his Church. Apparently you have not read all my posts on this subject, because I believe that everyone, including homosexuals, should be treated with respect. I have friends who are gay. However, I disagree with the homosexual lifestyle. They disagree with me and I disagree with them. Why would you deny me the right in a democratic society to express my ideas, no matter how offensive you might find them? I advocate no violence or gross acts of discrimination. I believe in working within the system, yes, even though the legislation and judicial process might very well go the other way. I do not believe in policing bedrooms and neither do I believe in a totalitarianism that masquerades as democratic liberalism. As for Catholics who think differently, yes, some do, and that is their choice. However, as a priest and a Catholic Christian, I remain with the solid teaching of Christ and his Church and not with that of the contemporary dissenters. They base their views less upon the preaching of the Church than upon the views of MTV and a secular culture.

LARA:

At the risk of sounding like a simpleton, Father, this question has occurred to me: does our incessant insanity ever cause our Creator to weep?

STEVE:

“They are senseless, faithless, heartless, and ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.” (Romans 1:26-32)

…to me this sounds like the self-appointed kings and queens I see braying continuously about the perceived evils in others.

Before swinging that bat so widely, let’s just purge the church of all the homosexuals.

Then let’s see how many guys are left standing there in their satins and velvets and embroidered hats.

FATHER JOE:

Most of the clergy I know and with whom I have worked are faithful to their celibacy. I would suspect they are also mostly heterosexuals, although a few bad eggs have given the Church pretty bad press. Pray that priests and bishops will be faithful to God, loving and protecting their flocks. By the way, even REAL MEN can wear the fancy uniforms. Peace!

GRAHAM:

Make no mistake about it: practicing homosexuality is a sin that will send people to hell; but, let’s not forget adultery, fornication, lying (white lies included), hatred, malice, envy and so forth. Read the 17 works of the flesh by Paul.

However, I do believe there are those individuals who are truly born with a desire for their own sex; it is a curse brought down through the generations— and it is an abnormality. God said He would visit the sins of the fathers from 3-4 generations ago upon the children.

(Exodus 20:5) “… for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me.”

In conclusion, the desire for your own sex, in and of itself, is not sin, just temptation. If, however, that desire is put into practice, you have sinned.

Love the Lord your God and He will make your ways straight (no pun intended).
(Exodus 20:6) “And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.”

FRACTAL:

Love is good, God is Love. Liberty is good, too.

RENEGADE ICONOCLAST:

Mat. 7:1-5 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

  • speck: ‘sin’ between consenting adults
  • plank: pedophiles running around in the Church

FATHER JOE:

You would quote Scripture to get me to stop quoting Scripture? Pleeease! As for your “speck” and “plank” distinction, it is misapplied. Serious sins are all planks: fornication, homosexuality, as well as pederasty and pedophilia— all planks that need removal if blindness is not to become permanent. Mortal sin is mortal sin, although I would grant you that the sin between a man and woman is “according to nature” and the others are “opposed or in contradiction to nature.”

MORSE:

“…and begin to impose that lifestyle on me, my children and those who have not chosen such a life,” this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

No one is imposing anything on you. No one is forcing you or your children to be gay. We’re just trying to keep people not unlike yourself from imposing your lifestyle on others.

Here’s a nice metaphor: if you’re hitting someone with a stick, and I take the stick away, I’m not imposing on your rights. I’m protecting the right of the person you’re hitting.

JOHN:

Homosexuality is definitely wrong and serious sin. Yet that does not mean that they cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. They can repent and become chaste in their lives and receive the sacraments if they free themselves from this sin. Yes it is hard to reason with homosexuals, abortionists and atheists that get ugly and turn their heads from logic. I personally thought I could change them but it is not me, it is God that does the changing.

This discussion will continue in another post.

Is the HHS Compromise Really a Compromise?

CLICK HERE to read Cardinal Wuerl’s response to compromise.

CLICK HERE to read Cardinal Dolan’s letter to fellow bishops.

Who is the architect of this fiasco with the HHS?

The buck stops with the President and the head of the department, which he appointed: Kathleen Sebelius. What is her background as a “Catholic”?

When she was governor, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas told her that she “should stop receiving Communion until she publicly repudiates her support of abortion.” More recently, Archbishop Raymond F. Burke, former archbishop of St. Louis but now prefect for the Apostolic Signatura, the Vatican’s highest court, ruled that Mrs. Sebelius should not approach the altar for Communion in the United States.  Despite pastoral admonition, she obstinately persists in serious sin and now she would entice the bishops and the rest of the Church to join her.

In 2008, Sebelius vetoed House Substitute for Senate Bill 389, titled the Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act by its sponsors. Proponents of the bill claimed the legislation would strengthen late-term abortion laws and prevent “coerced abortions” particularly with respect to minors.

She has been given high ratings and endorsement from Planned Parenthood, the biggest abortion provider around. It has made a financial “killing” in destroying unborn children under the banner of women’s rights.

The administration was SHOCKED into making a compromise… not because religious liberty was esteemed as an important value in itself. 

The Obama administration hopes that the U.S. bishops will accept its proposed compromise (February 10, 2012). However, while we are still awaiting word from our shepherds, I still have serious reservations. The administration was shocked that even liberal Catholic voices were joining the chorus in deploring the initial policy as encroachment upon religious liberty. It was certain that there would be no movement of the Obama Whitehouse away from the giving women free access to contraception. But as Republicans picked up on the issue, election strategists urged an immediate counter-strategy.  The offer of a year of grace was insufficient.  Is this the best for which we can hope? Might this merely be a ploy to defuse the situation while really changing very little? Catholic parishes, schools, charities, and hospitals should not be forced to provide birth control to employees since such would violate Catholic teaching against artificial contraception.  That is the bottom line!

Even if the institution is protected; what about the rights of individual believers? What about individuals and organizations that are not part of the Church administration but are Catholic in values? EWTN, for instance, is a lay organization with a lay board.

The sentiments of Catholics and other pro-life Christians would not be respected by this change. The Church is more than the institution but is found in her membership. Their personal religious rights and conscience would not be respected. I know a doctor who runs her own practice and refuses to prescribe birth control. Now, she would still be forced to pay for it as a health benefit for employees! That is wrong and the Church needs to be a voice for people like her. Similarly, I know a man who refused to take a vaccine because there was the remote use of embryonic material from an abortion. He would rather close shop than add his money to the purchase of abortifacients.

The First Amendment protects not only the rights of churches but the individuals who make up those faith communities. Even if Catholics should themselves personally dissent, continued membership implies that they still respect (on some level) the teachings and the authority of the Church. I suspect that President Obama miscalculated in thinking that Church teaching was subject to polls or that liberal Catholics could force further passivity upon the bishops. This new measure might protect Church institutions and pamper dissenters, but it would hang faithful Catholic citizens out to dry. Their rights would not be respected.

Nothing has really changed, what we have here is only magical sleight-of-hand.

The revised rule says that religious organizations would not have to offer or pay for contraception. So far, so good; but then it stipulates that health insurers would have to take up the cost and provide it directly to women for free. Does this really leave the employer out of the equation? It seems to me that what we have here is a new version of the old shell game. Nothing is really free. The money is going to have to come from somewhere. What will happen is that premiums will go up and people will pay more for a sick person’s needed antibiotic to make up for a promiscuous woman’s contraceptive.

What about those dioceses which are self-insured? Would this force us out of the insurance business?

Another wrinkle, and I see this as very problematical in my own Archdiocese, is that we are self-insured. There is no absolutely independent insurance entity to which we can give the dubious honor of providing contraception. I suppose such a measure would also make it hard for practicing Catholics to function at the leadership level or as CEOs of insurance agencies.

Where do we go from here?

It is not clear to me that the Obama administration really wants to go to the bargaining table. However, the bishops have suggested that this newest offer is a sign that he is willing to make some kind of compromise. It is my interpretation and I admit to being fallible, that there remains a serious hurdle and that we must take to heart Archbishop Timothy Dolan’s remarks in The Wall Street Journal, “Coercing religious ministries and citizens to pay directly for actions that violate their teaching is an unprecedented incursion into freedom of conscience.”  This really says it all and is the line from which we must not retreat.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has made this statement: “The only complete solution to this religious liberty problem is for HHS to rescind the mandate of these objectionable services.” The statement continues, “We will therefore continue–with no less vigor, no less sense of urgency–our efforts to correct this problem through the other two branches of government.”

We must urge Congress to pass the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act!

Apostolic Tradition Vetoes Priestesses

The early Christian community kept faith with the practice of Jesus in depending entirely on male priests. The Scriptural witness is ratified at every turn. Although the Virgin Mary occupied an honored status among them (Acts 1:14), there was never any hint that she should replace Judas as one of the twelve (Acts 1:15-26). Further, on Pentecost, despite the universal showering of the Holy Spirit upon the infant Church (Acts 1:13-14), it was left to “Peter and the Eleven” to take on the initial preaching of the Gospel (Acts 2:1, 14). Looking to St. Paul, it is evident that he relied heavily upon the help of women, maybe even more than Jesus did. Paul makes known Phoebe who served the Church in Cenchreae and also many other women who assisted him in his labors (Romans 16:1-16). He counted Priscilla and her husband Aquila among his friends (Romans 16:3), even entrusting to them the completion of his instruction of Apollos in Ephesus (Acts 18:26). Paul, who said some formidable things about the place of women, is left speechless when Lydia insists that he receive her hospitality at Philippi (Acts 16:14). The great apostle takes it for granted that men and women alike will pray and prophesy when the community gathers for public worship (1 Cor. 11:4-5, 13). Yet, even in the face of all this, he insisted that the leadership in the community and the official teaching come from male office-bearers. I mention all this because sometimes certain post-Christian and anti-patriarchal feminists caricature the early Church as a woman-haters’ club. Far from it, the apostolic community was in many ways more liberating for its women than pagan society; however, women were still not ordained. They felt the very real need to perpetuate the model of ministry established by Christ.

POPE JOHN PAUL II: “I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful” (Ordinatio Sacerdotalis).

The Seed of the Woman versus Satan

The devil is going to lose his grip. The tide is turning in the war with Satan:

“Then the dragon was angry with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus” (Revelation 12:17).

There is a clear demarcation between sides. Saluted by an angel as “full of grace,” the image is one of perpetual opposition to the serpent or dragon. The great fight has begun and the war will be won in Christ. Her spiritual children, the saints and martyrs, will offer themselves along with Christ in this warfare between powers and principalities.

This opposition between Satan and the seed of the woman, Christ, is indicative of the opposition between good and evil. Christianity does not really speak of metaphorical clashes between bad and good, life and death, sin and grace. As with the term of our faith and salvation itself, this tension is real and personal. We are not envisioning any kind of oriental principles or forces. Further, there is no equality or balance between good and evil. Whatever scenario is played out, the game is fixed.

The ultimate winner will always be God.

SOLT Press Release on Father Corapi

The Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity has put out an official press release on the FATHER CORAPI SCANDAL. Fr. Gerard Sheehan, the superior writes:

“While SOLT does not typically comment publicly on personnel matters, it recognizes that Fr. John Corapi, through his ministry, has inspired thousands of faithful Catholics, many of whom continue to express their support of him. SOLT also recognizes that Fr. Corapi is now misleading these individuals through his false statements and characterizations. It is for these Catholics that SOLT, by means of this announcement, seeks to set the record straight.”

While I can appreciate the need for a statement, I must admit that I am surprised at the bluntness and the depth of revelation. He remarks about the investigative process and what they discerned from emails, witnesses and other sources that has been going on during the time of the priest’s public ministry:

  • Fr. Corapi already handed in his resignation in early June.
  • He paid $100,000 to silence the woman making charges.
  • Other witnesses were similarly silenced and Fr. Corapi refused to release them for testimony to the investigative team.
  • He had violated his promise of poverty by holding legal title to over one million dollars in real estate, luxuary cars, boats, etc.
  • He cohabitated in two states with a known prostitute, recently began sexting one or two women and resorted to repeated drug and alcohol use.

I would not normally even post about such matters, but I can well appreciate the frustation of his superior.  Fr. Corapi is a powerful communicator and people love him.  If he is guilty of such things and is falsely placing the blame on the leadership of the Catholic Church, then public correction needs to be made.  Having said this, I think that the leadership in SOLT must be faulted for allowing this situation to grow so out of hand.  They should have reigned him in years ago.  Their passivity has now made for a far worse and more scandalous situation.  The press release continues:

“SOLT has contemporaneously with the issuance of this press release directed Fr. John Corapi, under obedience, to return home to the Society’s regional office and take up residence there. It has also ordered him, again under obedience, to dismiss the lawsuit he has filed against his accuser.”

A letter of resignation would not release him from his priestly promises and those made to SOLT. A good priest does as he is told. This is a bad situation all around. I wonder how Fr. Corapi will respond? I suppose die-hard fans will contend that the evidence is contrived and that the priest is innocent. And indeed, I would still argue that if he is innocent then he should make his case and work with the process. It is unfortunate that Fr. Corapi has forced this whole matter and scandal into the public forum. But souls are at stake and this delicate situation is about more than one man. If he is guilty, then he should demonstrate sorrow and contrition, placing his ministry and future into the hands of his lawful superiors. It would be a wonderful teaching moment and maybe the highpoint of his ministry.  Christ is speaking to him through his superiors.  That is how priestly obedience works. But will he listen? Will he fight for his priesthood?  This battle cannot be won with militant rhetoric or tactics of subterfuge.  He can only find victory by being a faithful son of the Church and a humble priest.  He must be courageous and forthright about any revelations exposed by the truth.  He must reckon himself as any confessor to be the first among sinners, “Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.”  Things will never be the same but God may not be finished with him yet.  I pray that Fr. Corapi will make the right choice and work with God’s grace in this.

An element which really upsets me about this situation is how one segment of the Church is set against another. Father Corapi comes under investigation and the priest comes out with a statement that the bishop and his superior have a right to do what they do; but next he talks about the real enemies of the Church and we all know he is targeting those who put him on administrative leave. Then he claims obedience but his personal corporation makes a statement that they are under no one’s thumb and the ministry media business will continue as if nothing has happened. By the beginning of June he submits his resignation and tells his fans weeks later that the Church has forced him out. Bishop Michael Mulvey and his lawful superior, Fr. Gerard Sheehan, SOLT, seek to clarify matters but then there is the public intervention on his behalf of the founders of SOLT, Father Flanagan and the Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Bishop Rene Gracida. Critics and fans of the priest can now take their pick and decry the other side as wrong-headed or evil. The impression is given that the Church is fighting with herself. Despite the lament of Fr. Corapi that this is a plot of the liberals who are out to get him, the battleground that emerges is between very conservative or orthodox churchmen and laity. Liberal revisionists are no doubt having a delight in watching the so-called “religious right” of the Church rip itself apart over the media priest. This has all the makings of a new voyeuristic television program called THE BATTLING BISHOPS. Since the clarification released from SOLT, I notice now that Bishop Gracida seems to have shifted somewhat from supporting Fr. Corapi to attacking SOLT for allowing the situation to develop in the first place. However, it seems to me that the stage was set by those who initially allowed Fr. Corapi to set up his independent operations. In other words, there is blame enough to go around. It is troubling that Bishop Gracida took a public stand against a man’s lawful superiors even though he admits that he has not talked with the priest for years! Now Fr. Corapi is telling his fans on Twitter to look forward to an important announcement on Thursday.  Enough already!  I discern a manipulation of good men behind all these tensions that is due to evil human machination and/or to the intrusion of something devilish.

Phil Lawler at CATHOLIC CULTURE succinctly tells it as it is:

Like the late Father Marcial Maciel, the disgraced founder of the Legion of Christ, John Corapi has worked for years as a celebrity priest: encouraging a cult of personality, setting his own agenda, raising large sums of money that he spent at his own discretion, and—most dangerous of all—accountable to no one. It was a formula for disaster, and now the disaster has occurred. Again.

I would beg people to separate the truths Father taught from the possible failings of the messenger. All are tempted, but the devil delights in targeting priests; while he could not seduce the high priest Christ, he often settles for corrupting those men who participate in his priesthood. Pray for priests, pray for Father Corapi and pray for “the little ones” who might despair of their faith.

I am done with this topic, but will give Father Corapi the last word:

FINANCES…”From the earliest days (more than twenty years ago) the Founder of the Society of Our Lady, Fr. James Flanagan, encouraged me to support myself and the Church as well.”

IMPROPRIETY…”I have never had any promiscuous or even inappropriate relations with her.”

INVESTIGATION…”As standard practice, my legal counsel advised me not to cooperate with the investigation until I was able to determine that the Commission’s process was fair and I had adequate rights to defend myself.”

HUSH MONEY…”I never paid anybody off to remain silent.”

RESIGNATION…”I resigned because the process used by the Church is grossly unjust, and, hence, immoral. I resigned because I had no chance from the beginning of a fair and just hearing.  As I have indicated from the beginning of all this, I am not extinguished!”

CLICK HERE  to read the SOLT press release.

CLICK HERE  to read my post on this matter last month.

A good friend feels that this topic and the argumentation associated with it is not good for me. It is true that I find it very upsetting. I love the priesthood and the Church. I get defensive when they are threatened. I also worry deeply about the good of souls. It is true too that the plight of a brother priest is always felt very personally. Many of the comments, moderated and mostly not posted, are unreasoning and angry. So I am going to end it here.  Orignally I posted a video here that gave Father Corapi the last word, albeit with an advertisement tagged to it.  However, he has liquidated his business and removed all signs of his web presence.  He is gone from sight, but maybe not from our minds and hearts.  Keep him and the people he impacted in prayer.

The Book of Revelation: A Discussion About Interpretation

The Book of Revelation is not given to easy interpretation. It cannot be deciphered in a literal or fundamentalist manner that seeks to make quick and easy contemporary correlation. We have to appreciate it as a particular form of literature that utilizes symbolic and allegorical phraseology. Similar such writings of this genre appear in Daniel, Zechariah, and Ezekiel. While many will interpret it strictly in terms of future events, it actually has a great deal to say about the crisis in the early Church and her future hope.

11:7 – “And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them, . . . ”

This beast was understood to be the antichrist, the one who symbolizes evil in his own person, the Roman emperor, Nero. Christians witnessed to their faith by shedding their blood. (See Rev. 13:1-8; 17:8).

11:8 – “ . . . and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which is allegorically called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified.”

While it is geographically true that Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem, this is not the thrust of the apocalyptic text here. Rather, the emphasis is upon the figurative Jerusalem that repudiates God and his witnesses. This is clearly the new “Babylon”, another code word for pagan Rome. See chapters 16 through 18. (Anti-Catholics go so far as to make the leap in logic that the beast and his city are not the pagan emperor and Rome but rather the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. Such a view violates the meaning of the text and defames the sacrifice of early Catholic Christians.) “Sodom” and “Egypt” are symbols for immorality (cf. Isaiah 1:10) and for the oppression of the people of God (cf. Exodus 1:11-14). The authority of pagan Rome crucified Christ through its emissaries. Christ is being crucified anew in his members. It is an early holocaust of the Christian believers at the hands of a bloodthirsty pagan Rome.

The Book of Revelation is composed to deal with a specific crisis. Believers of Christ are dying in droves and the inspired author is urging the Christian community not to abandon hope or to betray the Lord. Jesus’ promise comes to mind: “ . . . and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age” (Matthew 28:20). Catholic Christians are reminded that God has not abandoned them.

Hope this breakdown helps, although it hardly exhausts the layers of meaning here.

**********          **********          **********

GIO: I don’t know. When Cardinal Ratzinger wrote about the explanation of Fatima in 2000 upon the revelation of the third secret, he compared the Angel with the fiery sword in Revelation to the Angel that the children saw at Fatima, saying something like “the risk of judgment looms over us.”

ARMANDO: Shalom! Fr. Joe, I am a devout Catholic and I’m very curious about the Catholic interpretation of the Book of Revelation. Father, can you tell me, who is the second beast? Who is this beast with a name equivalent to 666? I believe in the messages of Our Lady of Fatima. Actually, I’m praying the Rosary four times a day since I started working here in Saudi Arabia. I hope for your kind reply to these questions because I categorically don’t believe other interpretations of the Bible. I believe in the Catholic view alone, because it is the only true Church founded by Christ with its visible Head as St. Peter and His successors. May the God Abraham, Isaac and Jacob richly bless us all always! Thank you very much Father. I will include you in my prayers.

FATHER JOE: I would recommend a faithful Catholic commentary and a Catholic Bible with good footnotes. Throughout history there have been many antichrists. It refers to any and all who reject and oppose Christ and his Church. The term also signifies a false Christ or counterfeit messiah. This is not to deny the possibility of a singular apocalyptic antichrist; however, many authorities suggest that this pointed to the Emperor Nero or possibly another tyrant of pagan Rome who persecuted the early Church.

ARMANDO: May the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob richly bless all always! Father Joe, thank you very much! I learned just yesterday night, from Brother Michael of EWTN about the intimate relation of the Book of Revelation to the Holy Catholic Mass. It enlightened my heart and mind so much and it strengthened my Catholic faith even more. You know Father, I’m actually a Catholic Charismatic and I’ve been serving the Lord since I was 10 years old through our humble St. Joseph Chapel in Ibabao, Cuenca, Batangas, Philippines. I’ve been a choir guitarist up to the present here in the Muslim country of Saudi Arabia. We are without a Church and must worship in secret. Despite this situation, my friends and I, Filipinos and an Indian, started a small Prayer Group. We pray the Holy Rosary, singing praise and worship songs. I lead a Catholic Bible Study. You know, Father, we are very happy because there are many Catholics who turned away from our Church but now turning back again because of Catholic Life in the Spirit Seminar or CLSS. Two more questions Father: when will the 1000 years of peace happen and is Satan already loosed? Mama Mary, pray for us.

FATHER JOE: You are from the Philippines! My brother married a Filipina a few years ago and traveled to Manila to see her family. I have many Filipinos in my parish here in Maryland, USA. Many are far better educated. You can ask questions of faith and I will do my best to answer. But, please understand, I am quite fallible. The Catholic Church does not teach a millennium rule. Rather, we believe that when Jesus comes he will consummate all things to himself. As for when the second coming will happen, we cannot know for sure, despite various signs. Look at Matthew 24:36. Our Lord tells us that “no one but the Father knows the day and the hour.” As for Satan, look around the world today. He is still very much around and prowling about for souls to devour. Trust Jesus and Mary. Invoke the special aid of St. Michael the Archangel. May God bless you!

ARMANDO: Shalom again, Fr. Joe. Why is it that the Catholic Church does not teach a millennium rule since it is written in Revelation? Am I right that maybe it’s not a literal 1000 years of peace? And what are those seven plaques w/c the 7 angels brought?

FATHER JOE:

The notion of an earthly kingdom ruled directly by the Messiah finds its roots in the Jewish aspirations of a military and political leader. This imagery is picked up by the Scriptures but the time of Christ’s rule is spiritual and found in the Catholic Church and her sacraments. The new Zion or Jerusalem is, similarly, not the political state of modern Israel but the Church. Some authorities claim that a false Messiah or Christ will seek to establish an early kingdom. Here we are talking, not about Christ but about the anti-Christ. It is said that he would persecute the Church.

There are seven plagues preceding the destruction of Babylon. The imagery is borrowed from the plagues of Egypt.

[1] Men and beasts are smitten with ulcers (Exodus 9:9-10).

[2] & [3] The seas and rivers become blood (Exodus 7:17-21).

[4] The sun burns men to death.

[5] The throne of the beast causes great darkness (Exodus 10:11-29).

[6] The waters of the Euphrates are dried up and form a passage for the kings of the East (Exodus 14).

[7] Storm and earthquake destroy Babylon.

The Catholic Church gives no literal or fundamentalist interpretation to these plagues. It is enough that there will be both man-made and natural calamities.

Pope John Paul II (February 2003) identified seven deadly plagues that threaten the future of humanity:

[1] an insidious terrorism capable of striking at anytime and anywhere;
[2] the unresolved problem of the Middle East with the Holy Land and Iraq;
[3] the turmoil disrupting South America, particularly Argentina, Colombia and Venezuela;
[4] the conflicts preventing numerous African countries from focusing on their development;
[5] the diseases spreading contagion and death;
[6] the grave problem of famine, especially in Africa;
[7] the irresponsible behavior contributing to the depletion of the planet’s resources.

ARMANDO: Thanks again, little by little, the Book of Revelation is getting clearer to me. Is the “holy city Jerusalem” in Rev. 21: 10-21, the same as the New Jerusalem which symbolizes the Church? Why does it have walls, gates, foundation stones, etc?

FATHER JOE: The heavenly Jerusalem is paradise. The New Jerusalem is the kingdom breaking into the world through the Church. The Church is an extension of the Church in glory.

CATHOLIC GIRL:

Gio, during the Fatima apparitions, Our Lady gave the children a horrific vision of hell. They said that so many souls were going there so fast it was like snowflakes falling. She also told them that one of their school mates – a child – would be “in purgatory until the end of the time.” Without the Mercy of God, no one would be saved but his sword is a mighty sword of justice.

As far as Revelations, I feel that the Protestant “Tim Lehaye” books (and movies) have spread heresy into Catholic beliefs. Here in the south, it is the most argued point in adult Bible study. It is another aspect of too little knowledge of the faith. In a class I was in, where a Nun from the Seminary literally went through chapter by chapter, people walked out – and many called the Chancery swearing that SHE was the heretic. Most Catholics simply do not understand that we are not literalists as far as the Bible goes.

I often wonder why Catholics do not have more organized Bible Study (with nuns or priests as a guide). I think a lot of eyes would be opened.

ARMANDO: Father, does our Church teaches about rapture? I do not hear any priest teaching about this matter. And what is Armageddon?

FATHER JOE: The Church believes that Christ will consummate the world to himself. Rapture as understood by certain Protestants and in the LEFT BEHIND books is not part of Catholic teaching. As for the conflict against the anti-Christ, we are already in the thick of it. The Church does not insist upon a literal final battle in the Middle East. Apocalyptic literature cannot be read like a history book.

CHARLIE: It is true that the book of Revelation is complicated. I can’t stop thinking though how Revelation 17 and how the Woman fits the description of the Catholic church.

FATHER JOE: Mary and the Church is associated with this woman (with child). However, the Church is NOT the harlot or “whore of Babylon.” Be careful not to associate the Church with the anti-Christ. There have always been grave sinners in the Church; but the Church is holy because Christ is holy.

CHARLIE: It seems to me that the church is trying very hard NOT to tell us the REAL meaning of Revelation.

FATHER JOE: Give me an instance. Why is it that you, as a Catholic, would put your personal interpretation of Scripture over that of the Magisterium? If you believe that the Church is evil, why are you still a Catholic. Sorry, this does not wash! You are buying into all the conspiracy theory nonsense.

CHARLIE: With the church being around for so long and with all the scholars in the church, they could be more specific like all the other churches when it comes to interpreting Revelation.

FATHER JOE: How is the Church not specific? Apocalyptic language is inherently difficult, given our proximity in time and place from the source. Other churches, and I can just imagine what fundamentalist authorities to which you refer, make up or fictionalize their commentary. The Catholic Church is grounded on truth.

CHARLIE: I almost feel like they are hiding something.

FATHER JOE: Almost? Please, stop playing games. What have you read from Catholic sources about the Book of Revelation that makes you say this? What commentaries? What Church documents? You have cited nothing. You are imagining things. Be careful that you do not deliberately slam the Church.

CHARLIE: We need to understand more and get more input from the church on Revelation because we don’t want to fall into a trap in the end times.

FATHER JOE: [At this point it became clear that Charlie was a ringer or poser. He may have been Catholic but now he was something else. Some anti-Catholics use such deception to get under the Catholic defenses. They may cite catholic sources, but they are not really interested in the truth or discussion. They come to slam the Church and to steal believers.] Then get it already. What are you waiting for? The problem is you, not the Church. Here are a few books you might find useful. Also, look at the footnotes in a Catholic Bible.

The Book of Revelation: A Catholic Interpretation of the Apocalypse by John Tickle.

Apocalypse: A Catholic Perspective on the Book of Revelation by Stephen C. Doyle.

New Jerome Biblical Commentary (3rd Edition) by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy.

CHARLIE: Satan is a deceiver and the father of lies and we need to have a CLEAR picture of things when it comes to prophecy. Now more than ever….with the Prophecy of Saint Malachy and his clear prophecies of the popes…..which by the way are true and we see that even with his prediction of Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II. We see clearly that we need more information on the Book of Revelation.

FATHER JOE: The prophesies of St. Malachy belong to private revelation only and are not doctrinal or required for belief. It also appears that they do not belong to St. Malachy but to some anonymous source.

CHARLIE: It says in Revelation 17 that John was amazed by what he saw and this would clearly state to me that he was AMAZED by this vision because perhaps he saw that the church which Saint Peter started was in the end corrupted and polluted by an evil power.

FATHER JOE: Jesus promised that his Church would endure until his consummation of the world.

CHARLIE: I see this clearly as the last Pope predicted by Saint Malachy which he said would lead the church to destruction. Why are none talking about this?

FATHER JOE: It is because the prophesies are not reliable. They are interesting but I place no confidence in them.

CHARLIE: You can’t wait until it happens and have people led astray to the tricks of Satan. I know in my heart the church MUST know things, but chooses to keep people in the dark….because the latter days the church would be led by forces of darkness. It clearly states this in Revelation. “Woman” in prophecy means CHURCH.

FATHER JOE: All you need is to be faithful. Worrying about such things is not from God.

JOHN: I came to this partial understanding around 1980. The two horned goat is USA and Russia. The image of the beast is the Islamic republic of Iran.

FATHER JOE: Such connections are only conjecture. I tend to give the apocalypse a historical understanding. The beast is Nero and the old pagan Roman Empire. Apostate Christians might be the other beast. Anyone who opposes Christ and his Church is an antichrist.

JOHN:

Yes, such connections are only conjecture. Some conjectures are more compelling than others. Consider, the two horned ram and angry beast allegory is first found in Daniel (well before the first century). What is this fire from heaven, but the bombs of two nuclear super powers. The foreign policy slogan of current Iran is “Neither east nor west.” Thank you for your courage, which I know can only come from our lord, Jesus Christ.

I sent the above comments (in fuller form) to Pope John Paul II in the Spring of 1980. The response received was a letter from the secretary of state of the Vatican (July 1980). Here is the text: “The Holy Father has seen the kind letter sent to him, and has asked that I express his thanks, and convey his blessing.”

CHRIS: I think an inspired interpretation of Apocalypse is Steven Paul’s Apocalypse: Letter by Letter. Very sick with cancer during the penning of his book, this staunch Catholic had an intimate understanding of Revelation and just about managed to get all his knowledge on paper before his death. I can’t recommend it enough for any Catholic who wants a clear understanding of Revelation.

FATHER JOE: I asked around about Steven Paul’s book and found that not everyone is excited about it. One critic even remarked that there are a number of factual mistakes and interpretations which are contrary to Catholic tradition. A book that I would recommend is Apocalypse: A Catholic Perspective on the Book of Revelation by Fr. Stephen Doyle.

CHRIS: Unfortunately, Steven isn’t around to answer any of his critics. Given that he was a committed Catholic I’m surprised to hear there are elements of his book which are contrary to Catholic Tradition. Do you have an example from his book that I can check out?

JOHN:

It’s my understanding that those who hold anti-Catholic interpretations use the “seven hill” phrase to justify their view.

Must the singular anti-Christ be present for the present age to end? I had thought that Khomeini was such. When popes die their personnel letters are to be burned. When Khomeini died I burned my written interpretations of Revelations. Later, I remembered it was written (by me): “the image to the beast is the beast itself, that is, the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

FATHER JOE: Deciphering possible prophecies of the eschaton and the beast is no easy business. Is there ever a singular anti-Christ? During WWII and afterwards there were many contenders. What I can tell you is that there is ONE Christ. Put your emphasis there and on your relationship with him.

JOHN: Jesus was beaten, scared, and killed. His justice is not, and will not be blind. May he grant us the mercy, grace, and courage to help the needy when we see him. I believe you, Father Joe, have the best job this world has to offer. Thank you for your courage!

NEIL: Very interesting dialogue. I’m a 2010 convert to Catholicism from practically every Protestant denomination out there. I’m quite interested in Revelation and appreciate some of the questions here. Pertaining to Revelation 17, I’ve heard the reference to the Vatican before which never made much sense. An interpretation of the new Babylon being America and the new city being New York, actually registered with me. Are you saying Father Joe that this is referring to the fallen Roman Empire instead? Glory to God!

FATHER JOE: The reference was to pagan Rome. Further connections to present-day earthly cities and nations are merely speculation.

DOLORES:

Dear Father Joe, I am currently involved in a Bible study entitled “Journey through Revelation: Apocalyptic Hope for Today,” written for Presbyterian USA women. I came across your web site while googling for a Catholic interpretation of Rev.12.

I was pleased to read all the queries and responses on the subject of Revelation. The information pretty much jibes with this study and other sources I have read. I was particularly interested in how the Catholic Church interpreted “the Woman” in Chapt.12. I had always thought she was the Virgin Mary, and you did state that in one of your responses. Most of my sources say the woman represents the Church or people of God or Israel. You also mentioned this in the same response.

We are studying Revelation, taking into consideration the time in which it was written, the type of literature that would have been familiar to the people John was writing to, the terrible persecution the early Christians were undergoing— a book of hope rather than a book of prophecy. I’m learning a lot and looking forward to the rest of the study.

I’m glad I found your website. If you have anything more to say about Mary as the woman in Chapter 12, I would be very interested to have the Church’s view. Thank you.

JOHN: I’m so glad Jesus has promised his earthly return and kingdom. The prophetic message ends with this realization. I don’t really care who lines up as the bad guys of prophesy, but that his will is fulfilled. The epistle of Barnabas and Paul’s writings seem to indicate there will be a singular anti-Christ at the end times. The hope of this Christian is to understand and live with his/her God. I am a sinner.

CHRIS: Excerpt from Steven Paul’s interpretation of Apocalypse, p.171, may be relevant to what is currently going on in North Africa/Middle East: “It has already been shown, however, that the Beast will rise from that formerly Roman territory designated as ‘the sea’; therefore, the Beast will initially seize about 60% of the ‘sea,’ not just 30% by violence, because the ‘sea’ comprises North Africa and the Middle East, i.e., about half of all that was once the Roman Empire. Of the ‘sea’s’ two main regions, the Asian is the larger and richer in oil: it includes Turkey and the small countries immediately south of the Caucasus Mountains—Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Palestine. In order to seize that initial 60% of the ‘sea,’ the Beast or ‘little horn’ must take possession of some part of the Asian region along with all of the African, or he will simply take all of the Asian, or he will take much of the Asian and part of the African, such as Egypt and Libya.”

FATHER JOE: I suspect that like many before him, Steven Paul’s interpretation will be proven false. Such preoccupations detract from the true antichrists that surround us and who may even share our homes. All who are spiritually dead in mortal sin are opposed to our Lord.

DEBRA: Father, I am a revert. I am reading John’s Revelation. I have read these threads. Yours is a voice of reason and common sense. Thanks be to God for that. Please pray for me.

NEIL: Father Joe, what do you make of the locusts in Chapter 9? I’ve heard opinions that they are attack helicopters. Also, what are the Four Living Creatures mentioned in Ezekiel and Revelation? God Bless!

FATHER JOE: They might only be a blight of locusts.

JOHN: It puzzles me that Catholics, and Christians as a whole, argue over facts. For example, what does it matter weather Mary was taken up alive, bodily, or died and rose the usual way. Some things don’t affect the heart, one way or another. While it doesn’t hurt to put out a heartfelt opinion, to state it as fact, though it’s objectively non-provable, does no one good. Jesus’ resurrection is provable by its result.

FATHER JOE: Catholic Christianity treasures both faith and reason. That is why the facts about things are important and worth the appropriate discussion. Looking at your example, you seem to miss the whole point of Mary’s Assumption. Catholic doctrine is very clear: at the end of Mary’s earthly life, she remained incorrupt and was taken body and soul into heaven. The issue as to whether she “fell asleep” or “died” is not a contentious one for the Magisterium as both perspectives are acknowledged. What actually is death if one is not consumed by the grave, anyway? Her corporeal assumption is a critical point because it resonates with Christ’s resurrection and ascension. She is seen as the first fruits, or evidence that our Lord would share his life and victory with others. Mary is a figure for the Church. (It is this connection we find in the Book of Revelation.) We are also promised a share in eternal life and the restoration of our bodies and souls. This honor is granted her because of her unique role in the history of salvation. Her assumption flows from her cooperation with Christ’s redemptive work as the Mother of God and the Immaculate Conception. Our sentiments about Mary are not merely matters of the heart, but declared dogmas of the Catholic Christian faith.

Fortifying Ourselves in the Defense of the Faith

Many anti-Catholics only speak in general terms and with isolated proof texts from Scripture. Why? I suspect that their lack of background is part of it. Personal inspiration is an element of his or her faith that makes every such believer into his own Pope. Anyone, who contradicts them, obviously in their own minds, is deceived and/or lost. Further, fundamentalism tends to discredit cultural and language elements, or else offers a narrow interpretation. Often believers are guilty of the very thing of which they accuse Catholics, parroting their ministers and the leaders of their bible study groups. An element of seduction associated with fellowship is also at work. This emotional quality can make any rational discussion difficult or impossible. History is also avoided or skewed so as to avoid the legacy of Catholicism and its contribution to our Judeo-Christian heritage.

Critics have sometimes challenged me for being too general in my arguments. Nevertheless, while on Internet message boards I always preferred a response to the deletion of a post. Of course, some comments are so vulgar and offensive that they must be deleted. These critics would then argue (no doubt from minimal experience) that such an approach was typical of Catholic priests who cannot answer and feel trapped regarding so-called biblical truths. What really troubled this priest was the total disregard for scholarship and objectivity in answers. I did not make them up; they were the conclusions of learned scholars of faith, filled with the Holy Spirit.

Many of the more vocal anti-Catholic fundamentalists claim a Catholic background. Often it is quite minimal or contrived. A number of them have bragged to me about receiving all the sacraments and even getting married in the Church. As in following a formula, the next thing they report is that doubts arose when they started to read the Scriptures. I always suspect that they had “some help” to come to their anti-Catholic conclusions. Such is frequently proven to be the case, although these facts are at first withheld.

There is a purported moment of personal awakening and they discover that the Bible teaches contrary to Catholic doctrine and practice. What are some of the alleged problems?

1. The claim of the Catholic Church that the Bible is a Catholic book written for Catholics only.

Well, we do believe that the Catholic Church today is one with the Christian community established by Jesus and that is chronicled in the New Testament. This much is true. However, we also believe that the Holy Scriptures may be efficacious for all: Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant. It is in a unique fashion, “our” book, but we as Catholics do not begrudge it to others; indeed, they may find true consolation and encouragement toward conversion in its pages. We are glad to have been party to its divine inspiration and composition. It is truly a gift to all humanity. An insistence that the Catholic Church (in union with our Orthodox brothers and sisters) had nothing to do with the development of the New Testament and the establishment of the canon (for both the Old and New Testaments) runs counter to the historical record. Insistence to the contrary remains unsubstantiated. Rather, the fundamentalist simply contends that the Catholic Church has sought to suppress the Bible. This sidesteps the early history of the Bible and the conflicts over errant translations.

2. They insist that there are only 66 books in the biblical canon as opposed to the 73 in Catholic bibles.

The fundamentalist stipulates that Catholics “added” books and yet what happened was that after fifteen hundred years, Martin Luther SUBTRACTED books from it. He says they show no degree of inspiration and that they teach false doctrine– in other words, things offensive to the Protestant reformers and their modern-day offspring in the world today. He says that Christians did not accept these “Catholic” books in biblical times (he must mean apostolic) and yet there is ample evidence that they did. Indeed, the Greek canon containing the disputed books was implemented whenever Jesus quoted the Old Testament in the Gospels.

The biased critic tells us that Palestinian Jews during the time of Christ had already determined the Old Testament canon. This is historically misleading because it dismisses the legacy of the many Jews of the Diaspora. The Pharisees of Palestine set up four arbitrary criteria for the biblical canon:

(1) They had to be in harmony with the Torah or Law as interpreted at that time;

(2) They had to be written prior to Ezra;

(3) They had to be in Hebrew; and

(4) They had to originate in Palestine.

This immediately eliminated Judith (Aramaic); Wisdom, 2 Maccabees (Greek), Tobit, parts of Daniel and Esther (Aramaic and outside Palestine), Baruch (outside Palestine), and Sirach and 1 Maccabees (written after Ezra). All Jews did NOT generally accept this canon until a century AFTER Christ. There is evidence that the rabbinical redactor was also motivated by a concern to make the Hebrew Scriptures distinctively different from the canon used by Christians. From the earliest days, the Christian Church accepted the Jewish canon from the Greek-Roman tradition, the ALEXANDRINE CANON. As I have said before, Jesus himself quoted from this bible and the canon was not seriously challenged until the Protestant reformation. It should be noted that Martin Luther also rejected New Testament books. It is interesting that while Protestants accept Luther’s abbreviated Hebrew canon, they replaced the books he stripped from the New Testament. What did he remove? He eliminated Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation (Apocalypse).

[GOOD SOURCE:  Notes to the Fireside New American Bible (2011), p. xiv-xv.]

3. The anti-Catholic fundamentalist routinely claims that it is easy to prove the non-existence of the Catholic Church in the earliest days and yet they offer no real proof whatsoever.

Why? It is because it cannot be done. Rather, he attacks elements of the Church that have organically developed over time. This is like saying the boy did not exist because he did not yet resemble the man.

NO POPE? – Except regarding “fatherhood” (papa/pater), the word was not used, but this does not dismiss the role of Peter and his successors. Their authority remains, no matter what they are called.

NO PRIESTS? – There is ample evidence of men who participated in the one priesthood of Christ.

NO SACRIFICE OF THE MASS? – Here is the utter dismissal of the command of Christ at the Last Supper to perpetuate it “in remembrance” of him. The cultic and sacrificial language of the setting is unavoidable.

NO NUNS? – Of course, there were holy women who from their purses aided Jesus and the apostles and later others like St. Paul.

NO MONKS? – St. Paul himself advises a celibate life and imposes severity upon himself. The evangelical counsels are in effect.

NO CONFESSIONAL? – Jesus and then his apostles would make possible the forgiveness of sins. Even today, no special room is absolutely required.

NO PRAYERS TO MARY? – And yet, there are Scriptural examples of orations to consecrated figures or spiritual messengers from God.

NO PURGATORY? – Although Jesus offered ample evidence in his statements that some would need to be purified by fire and pay the last penny.

The anti-Catholic critic throws out one issue after another, making a concerted response on any one topic difficult to impossible. He needs no evidence, the charge itself is a proof in his own reckoning and unfortunately, enough to influence weak minds.

Catholics agree that those who had a saving faith sought baptism. However, he speaks about the various local congregations as if there were no unity with one another. Just as today, in reference to the many parishes and dioceses, the Catholic Church is one. Jesus established a Church, not many churches.

He contends that bishops were only the local pastors; and yet, the history of the matter would show that as the churches grew, so did their jurisdiction. These “episcopoi” were literally the successors to the apostles and shared in the high priesthood of Christ. There were many helpers, even though many human elements of the true Church would have to develop over time. Catholicism, for instance, admits that the papal electors (cardinals) represent a later adaptation to insure the smooth transition of authority and the effective running of the Church. There is no need for an absolute return to primitive Christianity. Indeed, because of the size of the Church, it would not work.

Protestant communities which wipe out the gains from most of Church history are forced to reinvent the wheel in this regard.

The assertion that Peter never went to Rome is a denial of archeological evidence, extra-biblical testimony, and the living tradition of the Church. Since it does not appear in the Bible, such fundamentalist critics assume that it could not have happened. The anti-Catholic critic mentions the rebuke and difference of opinion from Paul toward Peter in Galatians 2:11-14, but says nothing about the fact that Peter gives the decisive decision regarding the initiation of the Gentile men at the council in Jerusalem. He confuses impeccability with infallibility. Papal infallibility does not mean that popes are sinless or that every opinion they have is necessarily right. It is peculiar that anti-Catholic critics will often grant the Pope more authority in their arguments than he actually possesses. Of course, the critics save the final say for themselves.

Let me repeat, at the first council of the Church in Jerusalem,  after the debate about ritual circumcision, it is Peter who resolves the matter. The mere fact that Paul and Barnabas had come to Jerusalem illustrated their confidence in the apostolic authority there. As in any council, there was debate and dialogue; however, in the end it was Peter who stood up and supported Paul in his refusal to impose the Mosaic Law upon the Gentiles– they would not have to become Jews before becoming Christians. Citing the work of God’s Spirit in Cornelius and his household, whom they knew and accepted, Peter summarizes the core proclamation of salvation: “My brothers, you are well aware that from early days God made his choice among you that through my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness by granting them the Holy Spirit just as he did us. He made no distinction between us and them, for by faith he purified their hearts. Why, then, are you now putting God to the test by placing on the shoulders of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they” (Acts 15:7-11). We are told that the whole assembly was reduced to silence. The issue was resolved. Paul and Barnabas then enthusiastically recounted how God had used them as instruments to reach the Gentiles.

Many distinctions need to be made about Peter. He is certainly much altered after the Christ has suffered, died, and risen. The Holy Spirit on Pentecost grants him a special charism of authority and infallibility.

This did not mean that either Peter or his successors would be impeccable and unable to sin. The miraculous truth in the long history of the Church is that even weak and sinful men have seemed changed by the office of Peter. Without such an authority, we would suffer from the same endless fragmentation and deviation from Gospel truth that other religious communities experience. We believe we have Christ’s Rock to preserve and protect the deposit of faith. Given to Peter, this gift of infallibility is for the entire Church. We see its execution observed when the Holy Father makes a formal proclamation of dogma as the universal shepherd (the Vicar of Christ) on a matter of faith or morals. Neither the Pope, nor the bishops, nor an ecumenical council can manufacture new beliefs– they define something which has always been taught and believed, but reformulate it in a more concise and solemn way. A papal declaration along these terms is an exercise of his Universal Extraordinary Magisterium.

The unanimous teaching of all the world’s bishops in union with the Pope is called the Universal Ordinary Magisterium. This latter expression of infallibility is much more common. The laity and the religious of the Church also enter into this mystery. The Sensus Fidelium (sense of the faithful) among Catholics who have informed their consciences according to Church teaching and who live out the faith also touch upon this mystery of faith. (Admittedly this latter aspect is usually only mentioned by dissenters these days; however, they cite people who have largely rejected the deposit of faith and the Christian life– the ones to whom it does not really apply.)

Anti-Catholic fundamentalists often contradict themselves. For instance, they might argue, contrary to accepted biblical interpretation, that Peter went to the actual Babylon but not to Rome (1 Peter 5:13). However, if he at first disputes that “Babylon” was the designation for Rome coined by early Christians; he next acknowledges it in regards to the Popes and prophesies about the antichrist in the book of Revelation. Of course, now he is confusing the pagan Rome of the old empire with the Christian Rome of the Church.

Obviously, as a good anti-Catholic apologist, he denies the practice of asking angels, saints, or Mary to pray with and for us. Even those who were formerly Catholic seem ignorant of the fact that Catholicism teaches that all prayer has as its proper object, almighty God. Indeed, upon a host of issues, the former Catholics seem to develop a convenient amnesia about the truths and practices they once embraced. Instead, they attack “straw man” arguments, caricatures of a largely false or distorted Catholic faith, which were probably spoon-fed into them by the Church’s enemies.

These critics usually accept the divinity of Christ, something that others (as in cults) often reject. We can at least agree upon this point. He also acknowledges the Trinity. Although, he will fight the Catholic about the term itself since it is not in the Bible.

I remember one fundamentalist arguing with me by shouting a double negative, “We don’t need no mediator except Christ in going to Father!” What he actually means, and Catholics agree, is that Jesus is our Mediator before God and brings our offering and prayer to the Father. The discussion turned to the subject of worship and he said rightly that the Bible prohibits the “worship” of graven images. Unfortunately, he wrongly accused the Catholic Church of doing so. The economy of images is altered by the incarnation, and thus pictures and statues for Catholics are venerated as depicting holy personages or themes, but they are NOT WORSHIPPED. Only God is truly given divine worship.

Context here means everything. Otherwise, one would have to say that the Word of God contradicts itself. The invisible God of the Hebrews absolutely forbid the making of images for purposes of divine adoration. However, he did not prohibit images as such. Indeed, in the case of the ark, they were mandated. Of course, given the inclination of the early Jews to fall easily into idol worship, it is no wonder that the prohibition was often extended and made more severe.

Making a secular comparison, many of us adorn our homes with statuary, paintings, and photographs. We have them for beauty and for sentimental reasons. Is a picture of one’s child or a grandmother vain idolatry? I think not. Neither are depictions of saints and other holy personages.

The anti-Catholic critic condemns the Church for its many volumes on the liturgy and upon doctrine; and yet he makes no qualm about the many words his kind employs to attack us. Why would they deny Catholics the right to share their insights and spiritual reflection upon the Gospel? Any view that does not agree with his own, he considers consider a twisting of Scripture. The anti-Catholic fundamentalist becomes his own final (and flawed) authority.

Such enemies of the Church condemn Catholic remembrance and prayer for the dead, dismissing the second book of Maccabees. And yet, such a practice finds other Scriptural support and is an ancient Christian practice derived from an even older Jewish one.

Almost always their demagogic diatribes must include certain castigation against the role of works in Catholic theology. No mention is made that many modern-day Lutherans and Catholics have come to a consensus regarding justification by faith. They create false parodies of Catholic faith to tear them down. They are surprised to hear that Catholics also teach and preach Ephesians 2:8-9:

“For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God– not because of works, lest any man should boast.”

Salvation is a gratuity from God. The work that saves is the self-offering of Christ. Apart from Christ, we cannot save ourselves. If divine grace is alive in us then our Lord can continue to work in our lives. Everything done by Christ has value or worth.

Toward the end of nasty debates and/or vicious diatribes, many anti-Catholic critics will try to disguise their animus of hatred by saying that they love Catholics or that they do not condemn the Catholic Church. Do not believe them. When they have finished, damning the Church is precisely what they have done.

At points the anti-Catholic critic spouts silliness. He suggests that the Catholic Church disregard all its doctrines for the so-called true Gospel. And yet, her doctrines represent the Good News of Jesus Christ.

Catholics would agree with fundamentalists that men inspired by the Holy Spirit wrote the Bible. God is the principal author of Sacred Scripture. Differences in this regard would be that Catholics do not see such inspiration as a passive dictation but as the use of the whole person with his culture, understanding and language as part of the equation. This is Catholic doctrine, should we forsake it? I do not believe so.

Catholics would agree that Jesus is our one Mediator who makes possible our entry into heaven. This is Catholic doctrine, should we forsake it? Again, such a teaching is an essential element of the Christian faith. Jesus makes all the difference. The fundamentalist anti-Catholic critic might wrongly claim however that the “Catholic Jesus” is not the same Jesus with whom they have a personal relationship and encounter in the Gospels.

Catholics contend that Jesus rose from the dead. This is Catholic doctrine, should we forsake it? But Catholics also believe that the risen Jesus is present in the Church and the sacraments. While he might acknowledge a presence in God’s Word, the fundamentalist critic focuses upon the Second Coming as if Christ’s presence is either locked into the past or waiting in the future. Catholics not only have faith in Jesus, but know his substantial or real presence behind the accidentals of bread and wine.

Catholics contend that Jesus is God and man. This is Catholic doctrine, should we forsake it? Some of the anti-Catholic cults fall prey to the old Christological controversies which plagued the Church in the early centuries. I have heard ministers argue that the Jesus on earth is different than God’s Son or the Christ in heaven. Others subscribe to a faulty Adoptionism as if Jesus was somehow conscripted into being the Messiah and Lord. Others speak about Jesus like the Gnostics of old, certainly divine but pretending to be a mortal man. The Catholic Church possesses the full truth: Jesus is a divine person with a complete human and divine nature. Jesus was the pre-existent Logos or Word who entered human history as one of us.

The anti-Catholic critic paints with broad strokes and condemns what he does not understand. Many Catholics in the past were poorly instructed and their ignorance became fair game for religious bigots and fanatics. It is truly sad. Hopefully this book will help fortify Catholics against such assaults in the future.