Blogger Priest

The Goatman of Prince George’s County

Posted on October 8, 2012 by Father Joe

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

Filed under: Uncategorized | 9 Comments »

Should Priests Be Able to Witness (CIVIL) LEGAL Marriages?

Posted on October 4, 2012 by Father Joe

The CORPSE BRIDE promotion really has nothing to do with this article, although the film did remind viewers about sacrifice and “until death do we part,” albeit in a morbid way.

The post is an OPINION piece for me, and maybe I am wrong, but here are my two cents worth.

I recently read an article where a renown and orthodox philosophy professor argued that Catholic priests should not perform marriages as civil officials of the state. Right now in the United States, a wedding witnessed by a priest is both recognized by the Church and by the civil authorities. The couple must have a license and the priest signs it after the service, giving the couple their segment, keeping a copy for Church records, and sending the third page back to the courthouse for formal registration. The professor argues that given the disparity in how the State and the Church defines marriage, the priest taints himself and undermines the sacrament.

Obviously, the divorce culture has compromised the notion of marriage, and the absurdity of homosexual marriages has definitely complicated matters; however, should the Church isolate herself as an ideological, cultural and civic ghetto or safehaven?
Would this not surrender the public institution of marriage to secular humanists and hedonists?
Would we forfeit our right to enter into the national debate on marriage?

The priviledge of a priest witnessing legal marriages is not just a sign of overcoming past prejudices, but remains a steadfast witness that legal marriages reflect the natural law and that couples are called to holiness and fidelity. The priest and the Church offer preparation classes on marriage, the state does not. There is also a safeguard in the two-tiered program in that State and Church records help to confirm the freedom of people to marry.

The good doctor says that Catholic priests should witness sacramental marriages only. He adds that if the newlyweds want to get a civil law marriage certificate as well, that is left to them.

Does a priest really compromise his office by witnessing marriages that are recognized both by the State and the Church?
Given that such a statement were true, would this not mean that “every” priest and bishop would be compromised and guilty of serious sin?
If we permitted sacramental weddings that were not licensed by the state, would we not endanger the permanence of marriage further?
Would our married people be stamped with the stigma of cohabitation and lewd conduct in the eyes of non-Catholic believers and secular persons with high morals?
Since the state would not recognize such marriages, and common law marriages are no longer recognized in most places, could not such couples easily separate (even more so than with No-Fault Divorce) with little if any civil recourse?

Some countries require two ceremonies, a civil one before a judge or notary public and a ceremony before a priest and two witnesses. This is a possible eventuality, although it increases the likelihood that some couples would dispense with the Church service entirely. If the couple attempted to consummate the civil contract before engaging in the marital covenant, then they would commit mortal sin. Every such marriage would become a convalidation. Giving the Catholic minister the faculties to perform both a civil and an ecclesial wedding is a small insurance that this eventuality need not happen. I do not even want to imagine what the implications would be for inheritance, health insurance, pension and other benefits. Critics would contend that the problem is not the priest and his role for the Church and State; the trouble is that Catholic couples, who are the true ministers of the sacrament, are not keeping their promises. There is also an “intentional” difficulty with Catholics going to a hall or court after the Church wedding. First, it might undermine the full reality of the sacrament, as if there is something constitutive that is missing. Second, given whatever ritual that may be used, it may constitute “simulation” which is forbidden regarding the sacraments. (Marriage renewals must always adjust the vows to recognize that there is a distinction with the original and true marriage.) Remember, that while the notion of permanence has been compromised by divorce, the vows used by civil officials are often the same used at Church weddings, and stipulating “until death do we part”. Schizophrenic or not, such is the situation. For the Catholic there is no such thing as a parallel marriage, once the deed is done, it is done. Two ceremonies tends to harm this appreciation.

If one argues that state marriage is an entirely different species from Church weddings, then what about the marriages of Protestants and other non-Catholics by civil magistrates? Not bound by Catholic law, we always considered those marriages valid. However, by extension, the professor’s argument would seem to infer that such marriages, even between men and women, would have no more reality and substance than that of gays and outright fornicators. Of course, I am probably wrong here, and he would likely contend that “properly disposed” people would still be able to confect a suitable bond, even if only a natural one.

As a postscript, I have a priest friend (on the faculty of a seminary) who vehemently disagrees with me. He thinks that the Church should get out of the marriage business completely and hand the whole mess over to the state. Obviously, I would very much object.

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

Here is a recommended book that continues the discussion about the tension and disconnect between Catholicism and contemporary American society, particularly the Democrat Party:

Agree or not with it, the book makes interesting reading and will surely inspire lively discussions!

Filed under: Adultery, Homosexuality, Marriage, Priests, Religious Liberty, Sexuality, Sin | 5 Comments »

Twenty-sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time

Posted on September 30, 2012 by Father Joe

[137] Numbers 11:25-29 / Psalm 19:8, 10, 12-13, 14 / James 5:1-6 / Mark 9:38-43, 45, 47-48

While the first reading last week was prophetic about the coming of the Christ, this week the reading foretells something of the Church that will be established by our Lord. When critics are jealous that the “spirit” of God has led some outside the designated number to prophesy, Moses answers, “Would that all the people of the LORD were prophets! Would that the LORD might bestow his spirit on them all!” You might ask, how is the hope of Moses realized in the Church?

First, when baptized, a Christian becomes a temple of the Holy Spirit. In Confirmation, we are given a fuller share in that Spirit. We are commissioned to proclaim the Good News. The Spirit of God breathes life into us and implants the gift of faith. All the sacraments are given their efficacy by the Holy Spirit.

Second, by definition, every Catholic is charismatic. Every believer is a Spirit-filled prophet of the Lord. When a child is baptized, he or she is anointed and the priest or deacon prays, “As Christ was anointed Priest, PROPHET, and King, so may you live always as a member of his body, sharing everlasting life.” The Catholic community of faith is that nation of prophets for which Moses longed. We have nothing that is not given us by God. We belong to him and are to be about his business, giving him glory in all things.

Third, when we think of prophets the popular mindset is of people who can foretell the future. While this is certainly part of it, the better definition of a prophet is that he is one who tells the truth. Christ was the one acclaimed as the Way and the TRUTH and the Life. Remade into God’s image and in the likeness of Christ, we are to communicate God’s Word to a waiting and sometimes resistant world.

Fourth, a prophet must be imbued with courage because he stands as a sign of contradiction to a world that does not know God and sometimes does not want to know. When we look at the long line of biblical prophets, we see men and women who often suffered much, even from their own, because of the truths they espoused. It is easier to compromise and to “go with the flow.” It is always harder to swim against the tide of indifference and sin. Following Jesus, we can expect a share in his Cross. Speaking to how we reject the prophets in our midst, James writes in the second reading, “You have condemned; you have murdered the righteous one; he offers you no resistance.” Nevertheless, this pattern can be turned around in Christ. There is hope.

Fifth, are we genuine prophets or false prophets? James also speaks about this, challenging his listeners regarding that which they most treasure and how they treat the worker in regard to his just wages. Like Christ’s threats of Gehenna, he is critical of those who oppress others, writing, “Gold and silver have corroded, and that corrosion will be a testimony against you; it will devour your flesh like a fire.” We need to ask important questions of ourselves. Are we the nation of prophets we were called to be? Do we belong to God or does someone or something else own us? Do we believe “in my country, right or wrong,” or would we try to make it right? Do we put a higher premium upon peace and toleration than truth and virtue? Do we belong MORE to the Republican or Democrat Party than to God and his Church? Does work and play take precedence over the Lord? Are we the same Christians at work and home that we claim to be in the pew at Mass? How committed are we to justice, civil rights, religious liberty, and the sanctity of life? Do we pray and worship as if God is really listening? Do we sense God moving us to prayer and witness? Have we opened the windows of our souls to his energetic presence?

Notice in the reading that the Spirit of God was mediated. We read, “The LORD came down in the cloud and spoke to Moses. Taking some of the spirit that was on Moses, the LORD bestowed it on the seventy elders; and as the spirit came to rest on them, they prophesied.” This reminds me of the story where Peter encounters a crippled man at the gate of the temple, “Peter said, ‘I have neither silver nor gold, but what I do have I give you: in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazorean, rise and walk.’ Then Peter took him by the right hand and raised him up, and immediately his feet and ankles grew strong. He leaped up, stood, and walked around, and went into the temple with them, walking and jumping and praising God” (Acts 3:6-8). He in turn would witness by his actions to the power of God in his life. Christ has extended something of himself, his spirit, upon those who believe in him. Through the sacraments of initiation, he literally gives a share in his life. We become adopted sons and daughters to the Father. Through the ordination of his apostles as the first bishop-priests, he gave us the Eucharist and the ministry of reconciliation. Never before had God given such authority to men. Through apostolic succession, this wondrous SPIRIT is passed on from generation to generation and around the world. We are given different gifts, but all share of the same source, the same Spirit.

As with our Lord’s disciples, a few of the elders were jealous that two outside their number were touched by God’s power. But the Spirit of God cannot be contained and God works where he wills. I suppose this is a good reminder never to blaspheme or curse against the Holy Spirit when we find him active outside our ranks or in unexpected persons, places or things. Certainly it is a prime motivation for ecumenism after Vatican II.

The responsorial psalm alerts us that the message of a prophet always has substance. We do not follow vague platitudes. God has shown us his love by giving us his law or commandments. The prophet exhorts others, through word and witness, to fidelity. We must be obedient stewards of God. Of course, if our role as prophets is to be genuine then we must do all we can to root out hypocrisy. The psalm states, “Though your servant is careful of them (the ordinances of God), very diligent in keeping them, yet who can detect failings? Cleanse me from my unknown faults! From wanton sin especially, restrain your servant; let it not rule over me. Then shall I be blameless and innocent of serious sin.” The attached response was, “The precepts of the Lord give joy to the heart.” When we sang the verse, were we telling the truth? Does God’s law give us joy or do we fight against it? By the way, this means in every place, from the bedroom to the voter’s booth at election time. It includes the things we do in public and in secret.

The Gospel has Jesus employing Hebraic hyperbole to emphasize the severity of sin. Nothing should be done to harm faith. Jesus says, “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.” As with the elders and Moses, the disciples complained to Jesus about one outside their number who was used by God. He exorcised demons in Jesus’ name. Our Lord rebukes them for this and says, “Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.” Love of God and charity toward neighbor are the most essential traits of a Christian prophet.

Filed under: Homily | Leave a comment »

Twenty-fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time

Posted on September 23, 2012 by Father Joe

[134] 1 Wisdom 2:12, 17-20 / Psalm 54:3-4, 5, 6 and 8 / 2 James 3:16-4:3 / Mk 9:30-37

The first reading is prophetic in regards to the coming Messiah, but the posture of testing God is not something new. The wicked would always seek to put up roadblocks to the Lord and his saving works. Traitors within the ranks of the covenant people fought and even killed the prophets. This is in marked contrast to the humility of a disciple who embraces divine providence and seeks to make a straight path for the Lord. The reading unveils the deceit of evil. There is no discernment of spirits; rather, they have already made up their minds.

They hate the just or righteous one because he is everything they are not. Notice today, there are critics who malign the late Mother Teresa and the Popes. If you Google priests, you will find hundreds of links about scandal and crime, but little about the thousands who have been obedient to God and loving of their people. Believers are ridiculed as hypocrites and yet little is said about the works of justice and charity that millions of the faithful make possible. Those who criticize us would not lift a finger to help others unless there is something in it for themselves. Each of us is to be a new Christ in bringing truth, healing and forgiveness to others. We see Jesus in the oppressed, the poor, the wounded, the alone and the unborn. We are not social workers. Rather, in us is realized Christ ministering to Christ.

The enemies of heaven will not allow God or his messengers to tell them what to do or to honestly expose their sins. Here too believers are castigated as hate-mongers or out-of-touch because we stress purity before marriage and regard marriage as a natural institution between a man and woman. They deny the wrong of their ways and then seek to compel believers to accept their deviancy and/or transgressions as lawful. While sin might be tolerated, the beliefs and discipleship of Christians is given little quarter. Indeed, even the government now attacks religious liberty. The Church can preach what it wants inside the church doors, at least for now, but outside those doors we will be compelled to compromise our values, as with the HHS forced-funding of contraceptives, abortifacients and sterilization. Instead of admitting that the unborn man or woman has a God-given right to life, the powers-that-be would make the Church accessories to their murder.

The wicked in Scripture argue, “With revilement and torture let us put the just one to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him.” This is certainly the plight of Jesus Christ. While such a sentence might not befall us, there are places in the world today where Catholics still face the prospect of torture and death for their beliefs. Here we may endure public recrimination from the media and political figures, hefty fines, imprisonment and the closure of Catholic operations: schools, charities and hospitals.

Despite the mockery and faithlessness of the wicked, we have every confidence that God will never abandon his stewards. Whatever comes, we will take up our crosses and walk with the Lord. Man is not the measure of all things; instead, it is the God who made us and sets up the parameters of our existence and obedience.

The responsorial psalm gives voice to our confidence: “The Lord upholds my life. Behold, God is my helper; the Lord sustains my life. Freely will I offer you sacrifice; I will praise your name, O LORD, for its goodness.” I am reminded of a priest-friend who prayed this psalm with courage when he was arrested, not for violence or theft, but for saying his rosary outside an abortion clinic. They said he was blocking free access. He went to jail. The archbishop at that time said that we had permission to get arrested, but that we had to be bailed out for Sunday Mass. Most of us were afraid to take matters this far. We backed away. But he was filled with the Spirit of God and was dragged away and placed behind bars. The guards took away his breviary prayer book and rosary beads. He found out later that a woman coming to the clinic saw his arrest and turned around. She would credit his sacrifice with saving the life of her daughter.

If only we could truly live in right relationship with God and neighbor. The second reading is almost a lament of the human condition. We are self-seeking and rationalize our faults while we should be generous and repentant of wrongs. We attack those who would open our eyes to the truth. Our society is one where passions run amuck, nature is assaulted and foul practices abound. I grieve that our children should be exposed to such corruption. Do I over-make my case? Notice the vulgarity in music, film, television, books and the internet. More couples cohabitate than are married. Half of all marriages fail and adultery is the frequent cause. There is also a basic dishonesty where many people steal if they think they can get away with it. Fertility is treated as a disease and the unborn child is disposed of as a cancer. What can come of a society that treats a blessing as a curse? What becomes of a civilization where a curse or depravity is elevated to a civil right?

The Gospel reading has Jesus telling his friends precisely what is going to happen: “The Son of Man is to be handed over to men and they will kill him, and three days after his death the Son of Man will rise.” Nevertheless, we are told his listeners did not understand and were fearful about asking questions. Instead, they ended up arguing about who among them was the greatest. While we cannot know for sure what emotions this precipitated in Jesus, I would suspect that he was tremendously disappointed. They still did not understand— either the cost of his mission or their personal cost in following him. In response, Jesus singles out a child, places his arms around him or her, and says, “Whoever receives one child such as this in my name, receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but the One who sent me.” Our Lord took the least among them and singled out a child as the greatest of all. The apostles and disciples are not the masters of the kingdom, but its servants. They and those who would come after them were called to sacrifice personal ambitions for the sake of the kingdom— particularly the voiceless and marginalized. We still remember the child, both in our schools and in the womb. It is for this reason that true believers are a sign of contradiction in the world. We speak up for the rights and dignity of those who cannot speak for themselves. We proclaim the truth and hand down the values given us to each subsequent generation, both in and out of season.

Filed under: Homily | Leave a comment »

Fannie Mae Walk for the Homeless

Posted on September 21, 2012 by Father Joe

Come and join us tomorrow. I am offering the Opening Prayer and YES, I am walking, too!

If you cannot walk you can follow the link and donate for yourself or under the name of a walker, like me!

You can register online ahead of time for Catholic Charities at http://www.catholiccharitiesdc.org/hth

We can now encourage everyone to register early – that way 100% of the donation goes to Catholic Charities.

But everyone who comes to register at the park will be very welcome and appreciated! And it’s a joint fund-raiser – so all three organizations (Catholic Charities, Community Crisis and United Communities Against Poverty) will share those registrations and funds.

Registration on site begins at 9:30 AM (Allen Pond Park, Bowie, MD).

First 300 kids get free basketballs.

09:30 AM – Jesse Buggs, Welcome
09:40 AM – Mayor Fred Robinson
10:05 AM – Councilwoman Ingrid Turner
10:15 AM – County Executive Rushern Baker
10:25 AM – Father Joseph Jenkins, Holy Family Church
10:30 AM – Laila Riazi of PG Cares
10:35 AM – Wizards Cheerleaders
10:45 AM – Walk Begins

Wegman’s is providing food for the event.

Filed under: Archdiocese, Charity | Leave a comment »

Faith & Values in the News

Posted on September 20, 2012 by Father Joe

Religious Banners Removed at Catholic School

God forbid that young people at school events should get a taste of traditional American liberties, like freedom of religion and freedom of speech… NOT! Schools can teach science and the faith of atheism but are to make no mention a Creator. Schools can teach safe “promiscuous” sex and give away condoms, but not a penny is available for abstinence education. Schools are forbidden to teach the 10 Commandments and then wonder why youth misbehave and get in trouble with the law. All manner of vulgarity is tolerated but not a bible verse on a sheet… yep, these girls are real trouble-makers, but the right kind. When Islamic religious fanatics burn the flag, destroy property and commit murder… we target our sights upon peaceful Christian cheerleaders at a school football game. Ah, the world is insane!

Muslim Prayer Room Opens at Catholic High School

How many Catholic chapels are there in Islamic schools? Where does courtesy end and religious indifferentism begin? How does one reconcile this with the insistence that “Catholic identity” is not at risk in our parochial schools? Do the Jewish children get their private prayer space as well? What about the Wiccans and Satanists? Do they get chapels to honor the goddess and/or the horned beast? Certainly, we would not want to discriminate or be judgmental… would we? Ah, the plight of radical tolerance!

7-Election 2012

It does not look good for Romney… vote with a cup of coffee. The trouble is that the Tea Party is into another type of drink!

Ex-Priest Sues the Catholic Church to Clear His Name

If what he says is true, I really feel sorry for this guy and there needs to be justice.

The New York Times Remembers Sister Mary Rose

Rest in peace, Sister, and many thanks for saving children and Covenant House.

Children Freak When Disney Channel Cartoon is Interrupted by Porn

If trash television were not trasmitted at all then such accidents would not happen. The truth is that our children are exposed to unhealthy and vulgar images all the time. We cannot trust television to babysit our children. It is a compromised media. The providers are more interested in making money, even with virtual prostitution, then in helping parents to raise kids of good moral character and virtue. In any case, if adults are themselves corrupted by this media, then how can they pass on anything of value without the poison of hypocrisy?

Filed under: Atheism, Bible, Catholic, Celibacy, Conscience, Discipleship, Evangelization, Faith, Family, Modesty, News, Politics, Religion, Religious Liberty, Schools, Sexuality, Sin, Youth | 1 Comment »

Cardinal Dolan’s Benediction Prayer at the DNC

Posted on September 7, 2012 by Father Joe

With a “firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,” let us close this convention by praying for this land that we so cherish and love:

Let us Pray.

Almighty God, father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, revealed to us so powerfully in your Son, Jesus Christ, we thank you for showering your blessings upon this our beloved nation. Bless all here present, and all across this great land, who work hard for the day when a greater portion of your justice, and a more ample measure of your care for the poor and suffering, may prevail in these United States. Help us to see that a society’s greatness is found above all in the respect it shows for the weakest and neediest among us.

We beseech you, almighty God to shed your grace on this noble experiment in ordered liberty, which began with the confident assertion of inalienable rights bestowed upon us by you: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Thus do we praise you for the gift of life. Grant us the courage to defend it, life, without which no other rights are secure. We ask your benediction on those waiting to be born, that they may be welcomed and protected. Strengthen our sick and our elders waiting to see your holy face at life’s end, that they may be accompanied by true compassion and cherished with the dignity due those who are infirm and fragile.

We praise and thank you for the gift of liberty. May this land of the free never lack those brave enough to defend our basic freedoms. Renew in all our people a profound respect for religious liberty: the first, most cherished freedom bequeathed upon us at our Founding. May our liberty be in harmony with truth; freedom ordered in goodness and justice. Help us live our freedom in faith, hope, and love. Make us ever-grateful for those who, for over two centuries, have given their lives in freedom’s defense; we commend their noble souls to your eternal care, as even now we beg the protection of your mighty arm upon our men and women in uniform.

We praise and thank you for granting us the life and the liberty by which we can pursue happiness. Show us anew that happiness is found only in respecting the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Empower us with your grace so that we might resist the temptation to replace the moral law with idols of our own making, or to remake those institutions you have given us for the nurturing of life and community. May we welcome those who yearn to breathe free and to pursue happiness in this land of freedom, adding their gifts to those whose families have lived here for centuries.

We praise and thank you for the American genius of government of the people, by the people and for the people. O God of wisdom, justice, and might, we ask your guidance for those who govern us: President Barack Obama, Vice President Joseph Biden, Congress, the Supreme Court, and all those, including Governor Mitt Romney and Congressman Paul Ryan, who seek to serve the common good by seeking public office. Make them all worthy to serve you by serving our country. Help them remember that the only just government is the government that serves its citizens rather than itself. With your grace, may all Americans choose wisely as we consider the future course of public policy.

And finally Lord, we beseech your benediction on all of us who depart from here this evening, and on all those, in every land, who yearn to conduct their lives in freedom and justice. We beg you to remember, as we pledge to remember, those who are not free; those who suffer for freedom’s cause; those who are poor, out of work, needy, sick, or alone; those who are persecuted for their religious convictions, those still ravaged by war.

And most of all, God Almighty, we thank you for the great gift of our beloved country.

For we are indeed “one nation under God,” and “in God we trust.”

So dear God, bless America. You who live and reign forever and ever.

Amen!

Note: The major networks purportedly cut away from the convention and did not show the prayer.

Filed under: Catholic, Church, Conscience, Discipleship, Faith, Fortnight for Freedom, God, Homosexuality, Jesus, Marriage, Morality, News, Politics, Pro-Life, Religion, Religious Liberty, Right to Life, Sexuality, Sin, Social Justice | 1 Comment »

Religious Liberty, Traditionalists & Obedience

Posted on August 28, 2012 by Father Joe

The SSPX has made no secret of its opposition to the teachings about religious liberty both espoused at Vatican II and in the recent USCCB campaign against government intrusion.

We have faced many challenges to our religious liberty. At one time Catholics were forbidden entry into certain colleges like William and Mary. Catholic churches were burned and our worship was curtailed. Later there was the issue of public education and the reading of Protestant bibles. Catholic schools emerged to insure the faith of generations of children.

In more recent times there has been the issue of prayer in schools, the celebration of religious holidays and public symbols, and the status of the Sabbath or Sunday blue laws. The emphasis has shifted from a preference given to the Protestant faith over the Catholic, to an atheistic secular humanism that is hostile to all faith. Today, there is a concerted effort to force the Church to compromise on matters like homosexuality, artificial contraception, and abortion. Will the Church face charges of hate-speech for opposing same-sex unions and homosexual acts? Will the Church be forced to pay for contraceptives, abortifacients and sterilization in healthcare plans? How far will this fight go and how strong and courageous will we find Catholic churchmen. And will the Catholic people stand with their shepherds or with an anti-Catholic modernity? We would expect that traditionalists would be of one mind with conservatives on such matters; but such is not always the case.

The Church would not argue that religious liberty is absolute or that it “necessarily” applies to all creeds equally. However, the principle of religious liberty and freedom of conscience are critical to the Church’s understanding of human dignity. The more a religion reflects the objective order and spiritual truth, the more that faith must remain free from coercion. Mormons once taught polygamy and were rightfully corrected by the federal government. Satanism is restricted on military bases because occult services in the nude conflict with the military code of conduct. Sometimes peculiar things are tolerated in other religions so that the Church herself might benefit from non-interference, matters like the pacifism of Quakers and rigid alcoholic temperance. Then there are acts that cause quite a bit of debate, matters like snake-handling, the prohibition of blood transfusions (Jehovah Witnesses) and interdictions toward inter-racial dating. However, there are also clear limits as with ritual euthanasia, human sacrifice, bondage or trafficking, and the abuse of children.

Furthermore, society has the right to defend itself against possible abuses committed on the pretext of freedom of religion. It is the special duty of government to provide this protection. However, government is not to act in an arbitrary fashion or in an unfair spirit of partisanship. Its action is to be controlled by juridical norms which are in conformity with the objective moral order. These norms arise out of the need for the effective safeguard of the rights of all citizens and for the peaceful settlement of conflicts of rights, also out of the need for an adequate care of genuine public peace, which comes about when men live together in good order and in true justice, and finally out of the need for a proper guardianship of public morality.

These matters constitute the basic component of the common welfare: they are what is meant by public order. For the rest, the usages of society are to be the usages of freedom in their full range: that is, the freedom of man is to be respected as far as possible and is not to be curtailed except when and insofar as necessary. (Dignitatis Humanae #7)

Given the persecution of the Church in England, the separation of the Church and state was interpreted as a way to protect our interests. While an ideal state is one where the Church and state are in harmony, history has proven that such unity is hard to achieve and even harder to maintain. There was also the unpleasant side-effect that with the Reformation, the creed of the land followed the local prince. While such was legally tolerated in Europe to prevent bloodshed, this arrangement was very unfair to Catholics who felt abandoned by Rome and a Catholic Europe. Religious liberty in the United States permitted the Church to expand at a rate that surprised even the Holy See. Marylanders rejoiced to be liberated from the penal laws. Our Catholic school system grew to be second to none. It must be added that the separation of Church and state never meant a disavowal of traditional religious values or culture. Such is the extreme that we see today from organizations like the ACLU and the liberal People for the American Way. The American state was viewed by many of our founders as a Christian one, not atheistic as some contend today.

The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right. (Dignitatis Humanae #2)

If everyone were Catholic, we might presume that the public values and laws would reflect this fact. But states that are largely Catholic do not always remain sympathetic to the Church. Mexico in the 1920’s would be a case in point. The rupture of the Reformation took place in what were formerly Catholic nations. Never underestimate original sin and the hunger of men for power.

While we might hope and work for the day when earthly realms would recognize Christ and his Church, we leave such eventualities to divine providence. Anything else would be a pelagian nod to earthly utopias. Our emphasis is always upon the kingdom of Christ which is ushered in by God’s grace.

Some critics, particularly within the SSPX, would criticize the model of religious liberty taught by the late Fr. John Courtney Murray. They go so far as to fault its promulgation at Vatican II as the source for global apostasy and secularization. However, Father Murray simply gave voice to what he saw as the American experiment. I would argue that it was not an ingredient in the subsequent conflict with modernity, Vatican II or no Vatican II.

It is simplistic to demonize the council or to give a heightened importance to the pre-conciliar Church that it did not possess. The council was an attempt by the Church to respond to a changing world. Not everything worked out and many purposely distorted the meaning and purpose of the gathering. However, the world’s bishops did gather, it was a legitimate council, and the Pope ratified it. Those who utterly reject it will find themselves in opposition to a crucial Church teaching— that the universal Magisterium so gathered is safeguarded by the Holy Spirit. It is no wonder that those who oppose the council are neither united to the majority of the world’s bishops nor in juridical union with the Holy See. There are only two options open to critics of the council. Either there was a misapplication of the council by those who invented a “spirit of Vatican II” or there is no supernatural agency protecting ecumenical councils, the Magisterium and the Pope. It is for this reason that castigating the council is a very dangerous thing for a “faithful” Catholic to do. It leads either to a Catholicized variation of Protestantism or to atheism.

It is true that Cardinal Ottaviani shared a number of concerns about the council and his view regarding Church/state relations. It is no secret that this holy prelate was unhappy, especially given that his schema for the council was brushed aside and replaced. But he was only one man and in the end he was obedient. The fact remains that the majority of the world’s bishops and the Pope signed off on the council documents. The issue here is clearly one of ecclesiology. Pope Benedict XVI was at the council and yet critics would try and tell him what was what. The arrogance in all this is insufferable.

Church social teaching cannot be merely theoretical but must reflect the pragmatic reality of the world where we find ourselves. While there are stable elements, the political teaching reacts to the world around us: the disappearance of monarchies, the rise of democracies, capitalism and the world economy, the threat of communism, and increased secularism. Today, we would also add the effect of technology and communication, as well as the rise of fundamentalist Islam and their lack of tolerance toward the Church. The Church is seeking for ways to grow and arguing for its right to exist, no matter how societies might change.

Some critics contend that the “post-Vatican II Church” is apparently afraid to sanction those teaching heresy or promoting immorality; however, it is quick to enforce “disciplinary rules.” They resent that Archbishop Lefebvre was disciplined for consecrating bishops without a papal mandate while heretical priests remain in “good standing” to teach heresy and to actively dissent. I would argue that it is no less scandalous for traditionalists to dismiss the guidance of the Holy See. More than discipline is at stake but a fundamental view regarding ecclesiology and divinely appointed authority. The scandal is worse for those who feign fidelity to the Holy See while failing truly to obey the successor of St. Peter. No one expects fidelity from the liberal dissenters. Their only deceit is that they might still claim to be Catholic; but that is a shallow lie through which all but the most ignorant can penetrate. I would also argue for a heavier hand by the Church but I am neither a bishop nor the pope. I am sure the shepherds have their reasons for what they do. I suspect that the most liberal dissenters just do not respond to sanctions. The issue is not whether leftist dissenters have been properly punished; but, rather have breakaway traditionalists displayed sufficient contrition to have the last of their sanctions removed? I would place the highest gravity or wrong with the SSPX. They should have known better. Who knows what good their presence within the Church would have merited these past forty years? Instead, they abandoned her and circled the wagons. The consecration of bishops against the will of the Holy See threatened a parallel church. It is no minor crime. It deserves penance prior to absolution. I think this is the ultimate holdup. They can quickly find fault in Rome but wrongly imagine that they are immaculate and had no other recourse. What they did was wrong. It was a grievous sin. The Pope removed their excommunication, not out of justice but from charity. Pope Benedict XVI is a gentle man where I would have given them ultimatums. I am not convinced that the SSPX will ever return to juridical unity. That is my opinion and I hope I am wrong. Those who too closely align themselves with them, even if just for an anachronistic love of the old liturgy, may find themselves ultimately outside the lawful Catholic Church. They will join the Orthodox churches of the East in their schism from Peter, the ROCK of the Church and Vicar of Christ.

Certainly the license to teach theology has been stripped from numerous liberal theologians. Many have faced discipline and censure, such as: Fr. Leonardo Boff, Fr. Charles Curran, Fr. Matthew Fox, Fr. Hans Kung, Sister Margaret Farley, and Sister Elizabeth Johnson. The latter two were quite recent and Sister Johnson was my academic advisor many years ago in seminary. I have read all her books and concur with the evaluation of the U.S. bishops about the improper use of metaphor. It is so peculiar that liberal dissenters grieve about their treatment from the “right-wing” Holy See and yet certain arrogant traditionalists cry like babies that they are the only ones getting rough treatment. I would give them all a swift kick in the pants!

While there is much talk about a silent schism and a liberal fifth column of bishops who oppose Rome while weak bishops look on passively, I would include all four of the SSPX bishops as still another column opposed to the Magisterial teaching office and the living Pope. Those who castigate the council and Rome will become sedevacantists, mark my words. Liberal bishops are dying off and yet many of them would still bend the knee to Rome. The SSPX bishops have made themselves autonomous and the arbiters of all things Catholic. They want Rome to bend to them! Only the Magisterium under the Pope has the authority to interpret past Magisterial documents. The wolves are coming from every side; yes even some of the so-called sheep-dogs may revert to their wolfish ancestry. Defenders of the SSPX are wrong to say that four bishops (who are even fighting among themselves) can trump the Pope and 5,000 bishops who teach and minister in union with him! Sorry, but they are very much mistaken.

Addressing traditionalists, the Pope has given you the freedom to worship with the Tridentine Mass. You should be satisfied with that, say your prayers, raise your families, and steer clear of critiquing a lawful council of Holy Mother Church and the Holy See. Do not join the renegades, no matter what pretense to holiness or devotion they might exhibit.

I love our traditions. I see continuity in our faith. There is no pre-Vatican II Church. There is no post-Vatican II Church. There are various disciplines and rites, but old or new, there is only the Mass— the sacrifice of Calvary from which we receive the “bread of life” and the chalice of salvation”— the real presence of the risen Lord.

But I have no stomach for trouble-makers on the left or right. Pope Benedict XVI is the Pope. He is Peter. He is the Vicar of Christ. If you want to be saved, be subject to him and to those bishops in union with him— period.

Filed under: Apologetics, Bishops, Catholic, Church, Faith, Fortnight for Freedom, Magisterium, Morality, Politics, Pope, Religion, Religious Liberty, Sin, Social Justice | 10 Comments »

The Scandal of Father Bob Pierson

Posted on August 24, 2012 by Father Joe

STEPHEN:

Father Joe, what is your take on Father Bob Pierson?

FATHER JOE:

I had heard of him but had not followed the recent business about his ten minute statement that went viral attacking the initiative supported by the U.S. bishops in opposition to so-called same-sex marriages.

What the priest fails to appreciate is that conscience must be properly informed. Freedom of conscience is not relative moral license. Otherwise, the cause of conscience could be rallied not only for homosexuality but also for other evils like polygamy, bestiality and pederasty. Rather, true liberty comes with an orientation to that which is true and good. Obedience to divine positive law (as revealed in the Church through Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition) and natural law (as ascertained through the right use of reason to the objective order) makes us truly free. The commission of sin and immoral acts brings not freedom but spiritual bondage.

The priest in the video takes statements from the Church and churchmen out of context, much as a fundamentalist minister might from the Bible to support his claims. Cardinal Ratzinger, i.e. the Pope, has certainly always taught about the obligation in following conscience; however, he has likewise insisted that homosexuality is a serious sexual disorientation and that the commission of genital acts associated with it are intrinsically immoral.

Notice that he quotes Cardinal Hume who wrote, “Love between two persons, whether of the same sex or of a different sex, is to be treasured and respected.” His quote came in the context of a larger statement in the UK on the homosexual question. While it is certainly permissible to exhibit fraternal and platonic love, as in most friendships, it would be wrong to equate these words with sexual activity and or anal or oral sex. This is another instance where the priest’s remarks are deliberately deceptive. He is well educated and knows what he is doing. This makes him all the more culpable.

Father Pierson is selective in his quotes from the universal catechism. Note that he does not read from CCC #1601: “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.”

Although he attempts to bracket off sacramental marriage in the Church from civilly recognized marriages, such is only a shallow ploy to avoid personal censure and to elicit support from normally orthodox Catholics. The way that society views marriage informs and spills over into how the faithful understand the sacrament of marriage. Indeed, he, himself, is a staff member in an organization where a Protestant minister and an ex-Catholic bless same-sex unions. Understood in this light, Father Pierson is not only promoting immorality but is taking a heretical position toward one of the seven sacraments of the Church.

The speaker acknowledges that Pope Benedict XVI has declared that homosexuals should not be accepted as candidates for the priesthood. Father Pierson has “come out” that he is a homosexual who opposes Church teaching. We can only hope that he has kept his promise of celibacy. Regardless, he now ridicules the Holy Father and takes a scandalous position against the U.S. bishops and the Marriage Matters campaign. I should add, however, that marriage was threatened long before this issue of so-called same-sex marriage. Marriage was imperiled by growing rates of promiscuity, cohabitation, contraception, adultery, divorce (especially the no-fault variety), and remarriage outside the Church.

Father Pierson had resigned from his post as director of campus ministry after the Vatican officially barred men with “deep-seated homosexual tendencies” from ordination, and because of associated issues in the Church’s faith and moral teaching. “Because I can no longer honestly represent, explain and defend the Church’s teaching on homosexuality, I feel I must resign,” he said. It was also rumored that he was forced out, as he should have been, to avoid further intervention from higher-ups.

His local bishop, Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis has strenuously promoted the amendment in opposition to so-called same-sex marriage. He required parishioners in the archdiocese to recite A Prayer for Marriage as part of the General Intercessions at Masses. The U.S. bishops have been very clear in their opposition. Marriage is only genuine if it is between a MAN and a WOMAN.

Back in 1986, Cardinal Ratzinger, writing for the Vatican, made a statement for correction and support of a letter promulgated by the American bishops. Father Pierson selectively quoted him, but strangely and dishonestly, not this statement which speaks to the question at hand.

Follow this link for the statement:

Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons

ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS

“Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder…. It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good. A person engaging in homosexual behavior therefore acts immorally.”

“To choose someone of the same sex for one’s sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator’s sexual design. Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent….”

“It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church’s pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.”

“But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.”

Father Bob Pierson, O.S.B. should be disciplined by his Benedictine order. He has caused scandal and given rise to public dissent from the Church. His faculties to function as a priest should be revoked or curtailed. As a man under ecclesial obedience, he should either publicly recant his dissent or face immediate dismissal. A priest who recommends mortal sin is no longer aligned with Christ. Even if he should be demented or ignorant, he is now on the side of the evil one.

STEPHEN:

Father Joe, I agree with everything you said, albeit except for maybe one small clarification. You write, “Understood in this light, Father Pierson is not only promoting immorality but is taking a heretical position toward one of the seven sacraments of the Church.” Father Bob would disagree as he was careful to differentiate between civil marriages, which are all “outside the Church” and the Church does not recognize anyway and “sacramental” marriages within the Church. Thus, Father Bob would argue that his voting NO on banning same sex “marriage” has nothing to do with Church teaching on sacramental marriage.

I completely agree this priest should be disciplined severely. But will he be? Almost certainly not, and this is the primary reason for our current crisis. Dietrich Von Hildebrand called it the “Lethargy of the Guardians” as far back as the 70’s. We have suffered under the complete unwillingness of ecclesiastical authority since Vatican II to discipline clerics and bishops for egregious sins against doctrine and the faith. What makes it worse is that the same ecclesiastical authority DOES discipline and bring the hammer down for breaking procedural rules/canon laws that have nothing to do with heresy or doctrine. This sets up a practice which lessens the credibility of the bishops who selectively punish lesser offenses while allowing the most egregious publicly scandalous statements from dissenting priests to go unpunished.

I would dare say it is a sin for this man’s bishop or superior not to discipline him in some way, including at minimum, silencing him on this issue to at least minimize further scandal. Will it happen? I’m willing to bet you a shiny nickel it will not. And it is a slap in the face to you and other good priests who would be punished in a second if you did something like deny Holy Communion to a practicing Lesbian Buddhist who introduced you to her “lover” in the sacristy before Mass.

FATHER JOE:

The priest has a track record beyond the video. (I have not directly linked the video, only a strong critique. Those who want to see it can Google the liberal propaganda.)

He recognizes same-sex marriages as valid, both civilly and in the eyes of God. What confuses the issue is that he denies that there has to be concurrence or approbation from the “institutional” Church. I do not have proof, but like some of his Episcopalian liberals, he would love to bless (and maybe has) these unions. He is a regular speaker at gay-lesbian conventions. Remember, too, that priests are only allowed to witness marriages in the U.S. that are also civilly recognized. We function as both civil magistrates and as ministers of the Church. This is not the case in many countries where Catholic couples are required to endure two ceremonies. Such only happens in the U.S. when there is a convalidation.

I should add, that the Church generally recognizes civil marriages between spouses who are not Catholic. If they are legitimately baptized, then there may be a sacramental character as well. Indeed, if there is a divorce and a desire to marry a Catholic, they would have to pursue a formal case annulment with no guarantees of success. Now we will further have to clarify that we do not recognize adulterous marriages or feigned same-sex marriages. I suspect, given the pressure from the Obama administration, that clergy will eventually have to forfeit their civil authority over marriages in order to distinguish the sacramental covenant from the civil legal contract. Once the definition of marriage diverges, we cannot be party to something in which we do not believe. This may already be happening in light of no fault divorce. I would also not be surprised if the government should seek to compel clergy to witness same-sex marriages. The rights of the Church are very much threatened. I pray that our bishops and priests will have the courage to face fines and imprisonment. The latter is quite possible, if the Church’s stand against homosexuality should be judged as a violation of civil rights laws and as hate-speech.

Further, the priest has been involved in the Catholic gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transsexual community. He knows full well the canonical restraints upon Catholics and does not care. All this is to say that the video is deceptive propaganda. He is a liar. Even when he throws out crumbs of feigned respect to Church discipline, they are lies. If you are familiar with his work in Collegeville, then you would know that he also rejects the “proles” (open to human generation) element that is essential to the covenant of marriage. He literally believes that anal intercourse consummates the bond. It is in light of all this that I said that he is a heretic regarding the sacrament of marriage.

In regards to disciplinary measures, they may actually be in the works. Had he been a secular or diocesan priest matters might have been easier. The Benedictines tend to protect their own and have a rather progressive track record in his particular community. One of them (Fr. Anthony Ruff, OSB) recently attacked the corrected translation of the Mass at the national Call to Action convention. They also honored the Lesbian Buddhist-Catholic you mentioned and the pro-abortion Catholic Maryland governor was also in attendance. There are a lot of trouble-makers to go around these days.

Orthodox and traditional churchmen have a higher capacity for suffering in that they love the Church and seek to be obedient while the other side really does not care; liberal breakaway groups, as with Archbishop Milingo and Washington’s own Father George Stallings, were also censured and even faced excommunication. In this sense, there is some parallel. I suspect that many in the Church find the contemporary situation almost overwhelming given the pervasive dissent. During this silent and not so silent schism, there is also the worry that the wrong action might lead the ignorant or weak of faith out of the Church. You are right, not all shepherds are to be trusted. But we must also be careful NOT to spread calumny and to hurt good men who are doing their best.

Pope Benedict XVI seems to be hoping that attrition and orthodox replacements among the clergy might hold the answer. My worry is that he, himself, is not a young man. I have found an almost uncharitable delight in how Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, the new Ordinary for San Francisco is making the gay establishment squirm and fret. They were pouting the other day because he outlawed drag queens at fundraisers! Really?

Again, do not be fooled. He might say that “…for committed, same-sex couples is not the Sacrament of Matrimony,” but he really does see it as analogous. Remember, sexual activity outside of marriage is a mortal sin. There is nothing equivalent to it. As a priest he knows this. He is talking out of both sides of his mouth. The Bishops are right on this one. So-called same-sex marriages are indeed a threat to the genuine covenant of marriage, natural or sacramental. There is no loop-hole or escape clause that would allow Catholics to support institutional sodomy.

STEPHEN:

Thanks for the background. In this video he seems to take the stance of…”who cares what the state of MN deems as ‘marriage’ since the Church only recognizes sacramental marriages anyway?” He argues the flip side of religious freedom by stating that the Church should not dictate to the state how it defines “marriage” as civil and Church marriages are separate entities and (in his mind) serve different purposes.

FATHER JOE:

The secular sphere in the public forum would not appreciate marriage as a sacrament. Rather, the point of intersection between the Church and state is the traditional view of marriage as a “natural bond.” The growing division between the Church’s view of marriage, as well as that of natural law, is the reason why someone like Bai Macfarlane has campaigned heavily for traditional marriage and against no fault divorce. Some of her supporters would claim that the conflict or opposition between the civil and ecclesial view of marriage has reached a breaking point, in both the heterosexual orientation and its permanence. They argue that clergy should opt out entirely from working within the system. They suggest that the priest who witnesses any marriage for the state has corrupted (by association) the Catholic understanding. This argument becomes even more defensible if society should formally equate same-sex unions with heterosexual marriages. While priests will not officiate at the feigned marriages of homosexuals and lesbians; will the truth be compromised by our continuing partnership with government in witnessing marriages and signing civil licenses? But what is the alternative? Priests in Europe and Asia often find that in the dual ceremony-system, couples tend to cohabitate if there is any extended duration between the vows before a judge and those before a priest.

The priest errs seriously, by his own admission, for failing to fault the homosexual lifestyle as sinful. Indeed, he seems to praise and to encourage the commission of evil. People of the same gender can be friends but they cannot be spouses. A legal fiction will not make it so.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Bishops, Catholic, Celibacy, Church, Conscience, Discipleship, Faith, Family, Homosexuality, Magisterium, Marriage, Morality, News, Politics, Priests, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin, Social Justice | 8 Comments »

The Great Saturday or Sunday Sabbath Debate #6

Posted on August 22, 2012 by Father Joe

Lou writes:

“Of the Apostle Barnabas, nothing is known, except what is recorded in the Acts. There we have an honorable encomium of his character, and a particular description of his joint labors with St. Paul. It is a great injury to him, to apprehend the Epistle which goes by his name to be his.” (Vol. I., p. 126, Church History. Boston, 1809.)

Father Joe responds:

This is becoming monotonous! It does not matter to Roman Catholics if the author is or is not St. Barnabas! Authorship concerns have been conceded for centuries! Get a life! The important matter is the reception give the document by the Church and its antiquity. It gives us an accurate depiction of the mind of the early Church.

Lou writes:

“The so-called Epistle of Barnabas, a forgery of the second century.” (Cyclopedia Biblical Literature, article Lord’s-day.)

Father Joe responds:

Sorry, fragments and references have pushed the date back to 100 to 131 AD. You must be using out-of-date archaeological sources! (Of course 131 AD would make it EARLY second century– VERY EARLY!)

Lou writes:

“But the Epistle was not written by Bamabas; it is not merely ‘unworthy of him,’ it would be a disgrace to him, and, what is of much more consequence, it would be a disgrace to the Christian religion, as being the production of one of the authorized teachers of that religion in the time of the apostles, which circumstance would seriously damage the evidence of its divine origin.” (An Examination of the Six Texts, p. 233.)

Father Joe writes:

Read what I wrote before, it still holds! As for the content, the methods of rhetoric change over the centuries. It must be appreciated as a work of its time and not according to more modern standards. Many of the Church Fathers implemented allegorical interpretation. The greatest fault of the document is not the content but that the style is a bit boring.

Lou writes:

“The tract known as the Epistle of Barnabas was probably composed in A.D. 135. It is the production, apparently, of a convert from Judaism, who took special pleasure in allegorical interpretation of Scripture.” (History of the Ancient Church, p. 367. New York, 1859. See also The Old Catholic Church, pp. 8, 13. T. & T. Clark, 1871.)

Father Joe responds:

Yes, this is quite plausible. Here at least is one intelligent quotation that adds something new to the discussion.

Lou writes:

“The Epistle of Barnabas, bearing the honored name of the companion of Paul in his missionary labors, is evidently spurious. It abounds in fabulous narratives, mystic allegorical interpretations of the Old Testament, and fanciful conceits; and is generally agreed by the learned to be of no authority. Neander supposes it to have originated in the Alexandrian school; but at what particular time he does not define” (Ancient Christianity Exemplified. chap. 2, sec. 2, p. 47. Philadelphia, 1852).

Father Joe responds:

Given that the author of the commentary was probably not thinking about its use in the Sunday observance debate, the comments here are fairly to the point.

Lou writes:

“The author was probably a converted Jew from Alexandria (perhaps by the name Barnabas, which would easily explain the confusion), to judge from his familiarity with Jewish literature, and, apparently, with Philo, and his allegorical method in handling the Old Testament. In Egypt his Epistle was first known and most esteemed, and the Sinaitic Bible which contains it was probably written in Alexandria or Caesarea in Palestine. The readers were chiefly Jewish Christians in Egypt, and the East, who overestimated the Mosaic traditions and ceremonies” (History Christian Church, Vol. II., p. 677. New York, 1883.)

Father Joe responds:

Yes, this is not bad either. Although more modern scholarship suggests that he was a Gentile convert who was quite familiar with Judaism.

Lou writes:

“He could not be the author of a work so full of forced allegories, extravagant and unwarrantable explications of Scripture, together with stories concerning beasts, and such like conceits, as make up the first part of this Epistle.”

Father Joe responds:

Who is this by? Oh no, it is just like the epistle under discussion— ANONYMOUS! And yet, do you not consider it a comment possessing some weight? Alas, such is the same with TRUE Christians and the EPISTLE OF BARNABAS.

Lou writes:

The preceding historical evidence brings only one conclusion. The Epistle of Barnabas is a vague, fanciful production of some unknown author, forged at an uncertain date in the second century. I can’t base my faith on forged and faulty works when I have the option of by faith believing in the inerrant Word of God.

Father Joe responds:

Here you come out with it. You would not accept any testimony outside of the Scriptures. If such is the case then why did you demand a response from Cathy on Sunday observance before 100 AD? You underestimated her, didn’t you? Yes, you did! Boy, am I proud of Cathy! (See previous postings in this debate.)

As I said before, there is nothing FORGED about the epistle. The early texts do not claim to be written by Barnabas. He is simply an early Christian who wanted to be known, not by his given name but by his cherished faith in Jesus Christ.

The litany of anti-Catholic books listed by Lou, some going back as much as two centuries are hardly credible and objective critiques of the EPISTLE OF BARNABAS. Does he actually have all these books? Some of them are classics of backward and prejudiced thinking. The quotations themselves show that many of them disregarded the value of the epistle because it conflicted with evangelical thinking and their watered-down doctrines. This is hardly the criterion for judging the historicity and value of a work. No doubt Lou sees them as his spiritual kin in religious bigotry and dancing around the difficulty of Catholic truths.

Here are some links to aid Lou in his education:

The Epistle of Barnabas (MIT)

text/ipb-e/epl-07/barnaba1.txt

text/ipb-e/epl-07/barnaba2.txt

Apostolic Fathers at Christian Classics

The Epistle of Barnabas (New Advent)

As for the DIDACHE:

The Didache (txt)

The Didache (htm)

The Didache (New Advent)

I think it is appropriate at this point to restore all the citations Cathy made with the hope that Lou will read them with openness to the ancient testimony of Christian faith and Sunday observance.

Lou writes:

In conclusion, you have failed to prove that Christians BEFORE the second century AD were Sunday keepers. You are relying on false, forged, works.

Father Joe responds:

In conclusion— nothing— quite the opposite is the testimony.

Lou writes:

And I might add this. Even if there were some that it could be proven did in fact keep Sunday before 100 AD – it still wouldn’t prove your position that there was a Divine COMMAND to substantiate it. There isn’t any. As for me, I’ll stick with the Word of God and shun the false forgeries of the Didache and the so-called letters of Barnabas.

Father Joe responds:

There you have it folks. Just as I said, this has been a wasted exercise over a counterfeit question. The one additive I would make to Lou’s remarks is that he DOES NOT stick with the Word of God, but his own private (mis)interpretations of Scripture. It is a BIG DIFFERENCE.

Lou writes:

You quote [speaking to Cathy] Colossians 2:16 to prove that the Sabbath has *passed away*. This is not discussing the Sabbath. It’s discussing the shadow ordinances that met their fulfillment in Christ.

Father Joe responds:

“Shadow ordinances?” But you said NOTHING would pass away. Ah, excuses, excuses!

Lou writes:

“Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ” (Colossians 2:16-17).

The Sabbath day of the moral law is different from the “sabbath days” of the ceremonial shadows that pointed to Christ. The Bible makes the distinction. So should all of us.

Father Joe responds:

Absolute bunk! Do you make this up as you go along or does someone feed it to you?

Lou writes:

“These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, everything upon his day: Beside the sabbaths of the LORD, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the LORD” (Leviticus 23:37-38).

God set aside certain feast days that were also sabbaths and were holy days of convocation. And God makes the distinction between those sabbaths and the Sabbath of the Lord. It’s the ceremonial sabbaths that Colossians 2:16-17 is discussing, not the Sabbath of God’s great moral law of ten commandments.

Father Joe responds:

Lou, if you are not willing to study the languages of the original texts then you really must purchase for yourself some parallel bible translations. Note the rendering from the RSV:

“Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath. These are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ” (Colossians 2:16-17).

It is true that a distinction is being made about the various festivals, however, the SABBATH IS THE SABBATH. The text is referring to a hierarchy of holy days: the YEARLY festivals, the MONTHLY new moon, and the WEEKLY Sabbath. Your contention is preposterous that the Sabbath here is not the one of the Decalogue. It is made manifest that you know neither the history nor the Scriptures of God’s people. Cathy is again proven astute and correct. She is one smart young woman! If all college girls were like her, we would have few problems to worry about.

Lou writes:

And again, Cathy, the catholic church doesn’t look to the Bible for support of Sunday keeping. They cite THEIR OWN AUTHORITY for the change in Gods Sabbath. It really is a major exercise in futility to try and prove that Sunday is a Divine institution. Your misuse of the Scriptures proves you wrong. Your citation of forged writings proves you wrong, and even your church who fully admits that Sunday keeping is THEIR MARK of authority proves you wrong in attempting to do something that she herself does not do, and that is try to defend Sunday keeping as Scriptural. In this instance, Cathy, you are deviating from your church that cites THEMSELVES, not Scripture, in validating Sunday keeping. Based on these truths, I do hope you prayerfully reconsider your position. Peace!

Father Joe responds:

Reconsider her position? I hope not. Despite your protestations otherwise, she shot you down on every point. Just because the Catholic Church claims the power of the keys regarding Sunday observance does not nullify the salvation truth and utility of the Scriptures. Catholics do not believe in Church authority alone or Tradition alone or Scripture alone. Your faulty commentary shows that you really do not believe in Scripture alone. Rather, you believe in LOU ALONE.
Some of the books you cite against the EPISTLE OF BARNABAS are from the Anglican and Presbyterian (Low Church) tradition. I suspect all of them support Sunday observance.

HERE IS MY CHALLENGE TO YOU:

Do any of the books you quote against the EPISTLE OF BARNABAS promote the Hebrew Saturday Sabbath over the observance of the Christian Sunday? I suspect not. Perhaps I am cynical, but I suspect that you have never even read those books and only know them second-hand? Prove me wrong, if you can. I would be pleasantly surprised. Peace.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Apologetics, Sabbath | Leave a comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »