• Our Blogger

    Fr. Joseph Jenkins

  • The blog header depicts an important and yet mis-understood New Testament scene, Jesus flogging the money-changers out of the temple. I selected it because the faith that gives us consolation can also make us very uncomfortable. Both Divine Mercy and Divine Justice meet in Jesus. Priests are ministers of reconciliation, but never at the cost of truth. In or out of season, we must be courageous in preaching and living out the Gospel of Life. The title of my blog is a play on words, not Flogger Priest but Blogger Priest.

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

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

The Slippery Slope of Abortion

Someone wrongly argued the following with me: “And the slope between abortion and infanticide is only slippery if you accept that fertilized egg or a partially-developed fetus is in fact a human being. As most abortion-rights supporters claim the opposite, I fail to see the threat.” The discussion dealt with how artificial contraception degraded into an acceptance of abortion and that now it was reaching the new low of outright infanticide.

Actually, most abortion-rights supporters in the vast crowd make no “explicit” claim at all about the unborn, avoiding the discussion about the beginning of human life and personhood— with the possible exception of bloggers and paid advocates. However, particularly given modern tools for viewing the child in the womb, some die-hard promoters of abortion are admitting “it” is human, but not a person with rights. Others are arguing that the rights of the mother would outweigh even the rights of another person, should that person be unborn and “parasitical.”

Many deal with their pro-abortion stand with an avoidance of the biological truth, the real reason why plastic imitation fetuses are forbidden on network TV news. Obviously, the implication is that they do not “recognize” a life having value there; but many people remain pro-abortion no matter whether the child is in the embryonic or late term stages. The slippery slope is not a theory. It has been realized.

Fetal development occurs much faster than people appreciate and is so often misunderstood. There are no partial human beings. There is a child who grows, just as he would grow outside the womb. Certainly the growth changes in the womb are unmatched by anything after birth; but even a newborn infant only vaguely resembles a mature man or woman. They cannot talk, see properly, or walk. Without constant maintenance, they would most certainly expire within a very short period.

The late Pope spoke about this at length when he talked about a culture of death versus one of life. Concern about the “slippery slope” pervades the encyclical EVANGELIUM VITAE. Indeed, one of the reasons Pope John Paul II objected to the death penalty was because he believed a comprehensive and generous response in the cause for life had to be made against the current climate of death. In other words, a society that murders its own innocent children does not have the moral standing to judge over the mortal lives of convicted felons. We become desensitized to the taking of human life.

I should say that the “slippery slope” applies even if one should think there is only life “in potency.” Embryonic human life has all the components necessary for the formation of “fully developed” human beings. The Church insists that once the soul is infused, the subject is a human person with an eternal destiny. But, even more, the slipping and sliding goes back further to the issue of contraception.

While we certainly do not see the person in the sperm and the woman simply as a receptacle, as did St. Thomas Aquinas, nevertheless, a contraceptive mentality is inherently anti-life. If contraception fails, people will now say, “Well, there is always abortion.” Next, maybe they will say, “Well, the doctor says he has a thirty percent chance of heart disease based upon DNA sampling. Why don’t we just get rid of this one and try again, with the doctor’s help?”

Obviously, even the most hardened pro-abortion advocate has trouble with infanticide, once they SEE and HOLD a child. This was the case in Roe versus Wade when Norma held her baby that previously she had tried to abort. That is why many curse GE for their new viewer that shows the child or fetus, with great clarity. It makes avoidance of the real question increasingly difficult. But what if women should give birth while unconscious? Then doctors or husbands or significant others or just prior standing instructions could order the termination of a new born. As in Partial Birth Abortion, once allowed, what does a few inches in the womb or out of the womb matter? The fact that there were as many as 4,000 Partial Birth Infanticides last year (full term babies) is ample evidence of where things have been sliding.

And what if the newborn is not attractive? I used to help out at a facility for the mentally retarded (or “challenged” as it is rendered today). Tommy had a cleft face. His parents wanted him destroyed but the doctor said no. He was quickly abandoned. He had pins holding his eyes from falling into the cavities where cheeks should have been. He had no nose and only a rudimentary mouth. Everyone presumed he was retarded. He moaned and growled. No one could make any sense of it. His best friend was a boy with Down’s Syndrome called Mike. One day Mike came forward and said that Tommy wanted water. What? It turned out that Tommy was speaking, but so unclearly that only Mike could decipher it. Later, despite the odds, it was suspected that Tommy was not even retarded. When I left, the doctors were taking parts of his body and trying to build him a face. I prepared both of these boys for their first communion. Over and over again, I stressed that the host was Jesus and that Jesus was God. The bishop said that was all they needed to know. They both had value, independent of public opinion, or arguments about the quality of life, or the ramblings of pro-abortion politicians.

I have noticed that sometimes young people fail to appreciate the trail of dominoes we have already knocked over. Maybe age and exposure are important to seeing more of the whole picture?

SLIPPING OR FALLING OFF THE SLOPE?

  • 1930 – Anglicans became first Christian church to permit contraception (condoms).

CASTI CONNUBII is the Pope’s strong response.

  • 1960 – Introduction of the Pill.
  • The so-called sexual revolution.

HUMANAE VITAE is the Pope’s strong response.

  • 1972 – Roe vs. Wade legalized abortion.
  • Series of cases and incidents have expanded so-called abortion rights, partial birth infanticide, and euthanasia.

EVANGELIUM VITAE is the pope’s strong response.

The movement against life is not smooth, particularly since pro-life people are fighting such trends. The slipping happens in fits, stops-and-goes.

I have already gone on too long, but I would like to finish with an extended citation from Msgr. Elio Sgreccia of the PONTIFICAL ACADEMY FOR LIFE at the Vatican:

“It is also said that the argument of the slippery slope is a weak one: in my opinion, however, it shows that its perverse efficiency functions unavoidably because it implies the absence of absolute values that are to be upheld and is accompanied by an obvious moral relativism. It functions in the context of euthanasia as in various other fields of public ethics, regardless of whether it is a question of abortion (in this case, one begins with the case of anencephaly and ends up with the case of the child conceived before a holiday), or a matter of procreation (here, the first step is the request for the legalization of the homologous insemination, that ends up with the matter of the authorization of therapeutic cloning). / Once on the slippery slope, not only the logical slant comes into play but also economic interests, and then the slipperiness becomes fatal and inexorable.”

Conscience

What is Conscience?

In speaking about conscience, it might be best to first say what it is not. It is not the comical stereotype of an angel on one shoulder and a devil on the other, whispering opposing advice. Neither is it merely an arbitrary feeling that something is either good or bad. Conscience is an attempt of the mind to make an appropriate judgment about whether an action is either right or wrong. True judgment demands knowing the facts and deliberating over them (applying moral standards) prior to an action. We are obliged to follow our conscience even when a false judgment is made. However, as soon as we learn otherwise, (that an action we thought good is actually bad), we must accordingly adjust to agree with a now properly formed conscience. Judgment can be flawed for all sorts of reasons. Nevertheless, we are obliged to follow our conscience even when a false judgment is made. As soon as we learn about our error, that an action we thought good is actually bad, we must accordingly adjust to agree with a now properly formed conscience.

What are some of the ways we can make misjudgments? Well, we might be perplexed, scrupulous, lax, etc. When in doubt, we suspend judgment and do not act until a “certain” conclusion has been reached. Conscience needs to be properly informed and a judgment must be made according to the appropriate law (i.e. natural law, the Ten Commandments, and especially the law of love).

We are Accountable

In all of visible creation, only human beings are called by God to accept responsibility for their actions. We are neither pre-programmed robots nor animals who live according to blind instinct. We have been given free will and an intellect capable of discerning God’s design from both the natural order and from revelation.

Set Free by the Truth

Given the present situation, in the Scriptures and Tradition, we find guidance for ourselves as we continue upon our search to discover what is worthy of us as human beings. In the formation of conscience, the Catholic Christian needs to consider that the power to bind or to loose from sin which was given the apostles, still resides in the Church, and principally in the bishops under the direction of the successor of St. Peter. Rather than a principle of enslavement, it needs to be viewed as one of liberation. “The truth will set you free” (John 8:32).

A Dynamic Christian Conscience

There are extremes in conscience which might not be viewed as healthy. The “static” conscience would have the Church spoon-feed everything. This dismisses the power of the Spirit to enlighten us; it is a fleeing of responsibility. The “dynamic” conscience goes to the other extreme of embracing revolution or even rebellion. No one can tell them what to do, even the Church! The true path is between these two. “We can qualify this as the dynamic Christian conscience. This is the conscience which leads us to have a responsible attitude to someone, to Jesus, to the community, to the Church, etc. Every person who fits into this category feels a responsibility for a progressive search and striving to live out a life ideal according to the mind of Christ” (Formation of Conscience by the Canadian Bishops).

Gay Sex & the Law

I can recall when sodomy was not a “protected right” but a “perverse crime.” It was that way not too long ago. Indeed, any sexual activity, even with a woman, if outside of marriage, was often judged as criminal and there were set penalties. There is division in the Church on the subject and it may be that some have too closely aligned themselves with the American Psychiatric Association which redefined homosexuality from a mental illness to an acceptable sexual orientation.

One of my favorite television programs was DRAGNET. There is one episode where Joe Friday (Jack Webb) is railing against the sins of the city. Among them he lists “sodomy.” When the episode was repeated recently on television, the sound failed precisely when he moved his lips to say the word that is no longer politically correct. In another episode, The Big Kids, there is a dialogue which shows the change in secular morality:

Capt. Lou Richey: It’s not just a problem of law enforcement, it’s a community problem.

Sergeant Pearson: Trouble is there is no community captain. These people come piling in here from every where. They dont know each other and don’t want to. They come out here, make a down payment on a house and move in with a couple of kids. That doesn’t mean they made a home no more than givin’ a name to a place makes it a community.

Sergeant Joe Friday: Yeah and you get a littele weary of hearing every kid give you the same excuse when you tag them. You don’t understand, I just wanna to belong thats why I did it. Belong to what?

Capt. Lou Richey: What it boils down to is the new morality, doesn’t it, a whole new sense of values. The kids see it on television, in magazines. Even hear it from the pulpit. God is dead. Drug addiction is mind expanding. Promiscuity is glamorous. Even homosexuality is praiseworthy. How you gonna fight that?

Officer Bill Gannon: It ain’t easy.

Capt. Lou Richey: What you got to remember that, the vast majority of the juveniles you’re handling are the kids next store. They’re not hard core criminals. It’s just that for them it’s a great deal more important to be accepted by the other kids than to please their parents.

Today, the “love that dare not speak its name” (citing Lord Alfred Douglas) is proclaimed a civil right and thrown into our faces where ever we look, even in Cowboy movies… I know John Wayne is rolling in his grave!

The Church in Boston had to shut down its adoption services because the government made it illegal to discriminate against gay couples. The Archdiocese of Washington has done likewise. Catholic Charities in Los Angeles was almost shut down by a law mandating benefits and insurance (analogous to a spouse in marriage) to the bed-partners of homosexual men and lesbians. Renters are being compelled to permit gay men and women to live and commit mortal sin in their premises.

My faith in our society and the legal system is much shaken. I cannot say that I would generally trust activist judges or spineless legislators to make decisions that would please me or others with traditional values. I concur with the Church that homosexuality is “disorientation” and that to live it out is a grievous offense to God and a corruption of others.

Our compassion and love for them should not translate as utter toleration and/or approbation. We should encourage chastity and celibacy. While it is controversial, where possible, we should pursue proven treatments that have helped thousands to adjust to a heterosexual orientation (as in the work of Dr. Fitzgibbons). This issue is very emotionally charged. We are sorely tempted to look the other way and give homosexual advocates what they want. They insist that not to accept their form of sexuality is a denial of them as persons of worth. But such is not the case. The old cliché still holds, “Love the sinner but hate the sin.” Both natural law and the Scriptures condemn same-sex activity. Sexual expression is restricted to marriage and such is only between a man and a woman. No judge, legislator or shrink can truly change the truth about this. Going through the motions will not make vice into virtue or that which is false into something real. The pendulum is swinging. While gay sex was once illegal; it is now legally protected. Indeed, those who reject it are being subjected to charges of discrimination. I would err on the side of preserving our traditional values but not pursuing matters which would intrude into the privacy of people’s homes. I guess you could say that I would favor bringing back the proverbial closet.

Of course, even if we were willing to leave such people in peace, there will be no peace today for those who oppose the homosexual agenda.

The Commandments

Our Relationship to God

1. You shall not worship false gods.
2. You shall not take the name of the Lord, your God, in vain.
3. Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.

Our Relationship to Each Other

4. Honor your father and your mother.
5. You shall not kill.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not steal.
8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
10. You shall not unjustly desire what belongs to your neighbor.

The Greatest Commandment

Jesus asked, what is the greatest commandment? His answer echoes the pattern in the Decalogue of our relationship to both God and to neighbor. Christ says that we are to love God with our whole heart, with all our mind, and with all our soul. Loving ourselves as precious in God’s eyes, he reminds us to love our neighbor as ourselves. This is not a static kind of love; it means forgiving and not rendering evil for evil.

Reflection on the Decalogue

The first commandment reminds us that ours is a jealous God; there is no other before him. He is the one and only! He does not want us wasting our lives on false gods or empty superstitions. Even though there may not be many traditional worshipers of idols cast in stone or bronze, or of figures from nature like the sun or animals, this prohibition is still violated. We see this in dangerous occult toys, like tarot cards and Ouija boards. These things are hazardous to our souls because they sidestep God’s dominion over his will for us. They might even invite spiritual evil to penetrate our lives. This commandment also condemns sacrilege whereby persons, places, or things sacred to God are defiled. Even interest in the popular horoscopes can sometimes escalate beyond simple curiosity and become habitual false guides. God wants us to follow him alone.

The second commandment urges us to treat God’s name respectfully. This necessarily prohibits blasphemy, making false oaths in God’s name, and cursing.

The third commandment tells us to make the Sabbath day holy. For Christians, this obligation is transferred to Sunday. (It is interesting that most Protestant religions accept at least this one precept or legislation of the Roman Catholic Church. Otherwise, along with our Jewish brethren, they would respect it on Saturday.) We sanctify this day by prayer, worship, avoiding unnecessary work, rest, and joy. Therefore, something like failing to participate at Mass on Sunday is not merely a violation of the laws of the Church, but in a very direct manner, an infringement upon this commandment to give God his due.

The fourth commandment exhorts us to respect our parents by loving and helping them, especially when they are in need. While young and under their immediate authority, children must obey their parents. Reciprocally, parents must give a Catholic education to the children entrusted to them. Their spiritual and material welfare is essentially in their hands. The parents may extend or endow school teachers and others with something of their own authority. This commandment speaks to us in a less direct way about authority in general. All just authority comes from God. We are called to obey spiritual and civil authorities when they make legitimate demands. However, if there is a conflict between the laws of human beings and those of God, God comes first.

The fifth commandment prohibits us from either harming our own bodies or those of others. This commandment expands beyond murder or suicide to the various partial degradations: including such things as mutilation, striking another, harmful drugs, drunkenness, and carelessly taking risks with our lives. Abortion is a direct violation of this commandment. Our right to choose should never be deemed a higher priority than another person’s right to life.

The sixth commandment, taken alone, forbids all external sins against chastity. Once sexual activity is condoned outside marriage, as in fornication, it is logically difficult to confine afterwards, as in adultery. The premise is already adopted. Some fifty percent of the couples who live together prior to marriage eventually get divorced. The seed for failure is already planted. Sin is a mighty poor preparation for the nuptial sacrament. Considered with the ninth commandment, all interior sins against chastity are likewise condemned. The human sexual powers are given for the propagation of children and for the fidelity of a man and woman in marriage. Outside of marriage, it is a great evil to exercise these powers, which are not simply expressions of our flesh, but of our very persons— who we are! Inside of marriage, these powers must not be distorted in their purpose or in the motivation of two people in love drawn to union. Lust, even in marriage, is a sin and degradation to what it means to be truly human. It re-categorizes the beloved from a personal subject to an impersonal object. Instead of self-sacrifice and surrender— thinking of the other’s needs and happiness— we selfishly treat the other as a disposable thing with which we can seek our own gratification. If the beloved is no more than an object, then the stage is set for adultery because objects are interchangeable. This is the antithesis of the Gospel. Marriage is called to be a permanent union. Adultery is a gross violation of that permanent union which is to reflect the fidelity between Christ and his bride, the Church. The adulterer plays the role of Satan who would lure us away from our divine groom and from the wedding banquet of heaven.

The seventh commandment rejects stealing and unjust dealings with another. Even if we accept stolen goods, we have broken this commandment. All sorts of things fall under this heading: idling, charging unfair interest, not paying debts, not giving a just salary, and stealing someone’s good name. Restitution is demanded in cases where we have stolen or damaged the goods of others. This last matter draws this commandment to the eighth.

The eighth commandment would have us be a people of truth and good will. We are not to lie or to slander others. If we stumble into this sin, then we need to repair the damage caused by our falsehoods.

The ninth commandment, as mentioned under the sixth, requires us to be mindful of our thoughts. To occupy ourselves with sexual fantasies regarding others, not only breaks down our will in reference to actions, but degrades the one whom we are imagining. This is destructive to the dignity of the person who is reduced to an impersonal object, as in obscene films and other pornography.

The tenth commandment, like the ninth, reminds us that God wants our conversion, both in external action and in our internal disposition. To be open to the grace of his presence, we must free ourselves from within, of those persons or things which we might covet before God. In actuality, we might not explicitly commit a sin against justice, but we might “want” to do it. Even this needs to be weaned away. We need to reach a point in our spiritual life where we do not WANT to steal from or to hurt another.

We Are Shown the Way

There is much which could be discussed in the life of the Christian that falls under discipleship. Jesus shows us the way to the Father. His Mother hears the Word of God and it bears fruit in her very flesh, as the Woman of Faith. Like new Christs, the Twelve and all the followers of Jesus in history reveal something of what it means to be a disciple. During the course of any Christian study, commandments, confession, communion, baptism, and the sacrament of the sick deserve their own attention. All these things speak to our following the call of Christ. We pursue him out of love and obedience.

Precepts of the Church

1. To keep the day of the Lord’s Resurrection holy by worship at Mass on Sundays and on Holy Days of Obligation. We are also to avoid activities which would hinder renewal of soul and body, e.g., needless work and business activities, unnecessary shopping, etc.

2. To lead a sacramental life: to receive Holy Communion frequently and the Sacrament of Reconciliation regularly.

  • Minimally, to receive the Sacrament of Penance at least once a year if in serious sin.
  • Minimally, to receive Holy Communion at least once a year, between the First Sunday of Lent and Trinity Sunday. (However, weekly Sunday Mass attendance is still required.)

3. To study Catholic teaching in preparation for the sacrament of Confirmation, to be confirmed, and then to study and to advance the cause of Christ.

4. To observe the marriage laws of the Church; to give religious training by word and example to one’s children; and to use parish schools and/or religious education programs.

5. To strengthen and support the Church. This consists in assisting one’s own parish community and parish priests, as well as the worldwide Church and the Holy Father.

6. To do penance, including abstaining from meat and fasting from food on the appointed days.

7. To join in the missionary spirit and apostolate of the Church.

The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-10)

  1. Blessed are the poor in spirit; the reign of God is theirs.
  2. Blessed are the sorrowing; they shall be consoled.
  3. Blessed are the lowly; they shall inherit the earth.
  4. Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for holiness; they shall have their fill.
  5. Blessed are they who show mercy; mercy shall be theirs.
  6. Blessed are the single-hearted; they shall see God.
  7. Blessed are the peace-makers; they shall be called sons of God.
  8. Blessed are those persecuted for holiness’ sake; the reign of God is theirs.

Corporal Works of Mercy

1. To feed the hungry.
2. To give drink to the thirsty.
3. To clothe the naked.
4. To visit the imprisoned.
5. To shelter the homeless.
6. To visit the sick.
7. To bury the dead.

Spiritual Works of Mercy

1. To admonish the sinner.
2. To instruct the ignorant.
3. To counsel the doubtful.
4. To comfort the sorrowful.
5. To bear wrongs patiently.
6. To forgive all injuries.
7. To pray for the living and the dead.

Discussion About Priestly Service, Scandal & the Church

GH: (initial statement)

The Church has brainwashed you and you are a mere puppet of this institution! It is like a cult, if you do not OBEY or agree with every belief and precept 100%, you are OUT!

I walked away from the church after 25 years of trying to be a good Catholic because all I witnessed were MANY priests leaving to get married. (I knew of 12— that’s a LOT in such a time period!) Several others stayed and had women on the side. Oh yeah, these guys heard my confessions too and had the power to take my sins away— what a joke!

I suppose you think that when they die they will burn in hell, the ones who left and were laicized, I mean. Is this a loving reaction, BANISH them forever? (Their love is disordered, unholy and they all end up divorced, too.)

You wrote that there were only a FEW rascals? You sir are deluded! You try to maintain a facade of good and holy priests; I do not doubt there are some, and in fact pray there are, as we need them. Sadly, I think that it is the exception and not the norm.

You blame the individual men themselves (who left to get married). They wanted to serve God but perhaps after a while felt their heartstrings pulled one time too many? Or maybe they just gave into what you regard as the great sin of falling in love and wanting to be with a woman. Therein rests the conflict of wanting to serve God and wanting to love one of his creations. Why does there have to be a choice and why is the punishment from the church so final and damning?

But there is something wrong with a church hierarchy that claims to have the only true pipeline to God and to the truth while insisting on celibacy that apparently so few can truly live out.

FATHER JOE: (immediate response)

You might like to think that people like me are brainwashed, but nothing could be further from the truth. I was a public school kid. I was even kicked out of Sunday high school CCD. No, I was not stupid; rather, my teacher said I knew too much. It was embarrassing my slower classmates. Actually, I think it was correcting my teacher a few times that was the last straw! Because of ill health and asthma, I read a great deal on my own. Religion fascinated me, but I was no one’s robot. I became convinced of the Church’s claims and tried to appreciate them, not simply from authority but from my reasoning.

If people do not clearly understand their faith, we do not kick them out of the Church. We invite them to read the catechism, adult formation classes, and bible study.

If you left the Church because of hypocrisy then you placed greater faith in men than in God. It is no wonder you defected. You are just making excuses for yourself. You could have stayed in the Church and supported those priests who were faithful to their promises. Instead, you joined the crowd of bad priests and womanizers. How can you complain about them when you aligned yourself with them against the Church and her faithful ministers? You join the chorus of those who mock Catholic priests and their ministry of reconciliation. You should be ashamed.

You are another one presuming that priests like me damn the defectors and others to perdition. Where do you get such ideas? We preach about the mercy of Jesus and yes, about his justice. But God will judge you and me. We are all sinners. The posture of any good priest is to pray for others, especially for those who leave the Catholic fold.

I am not deluded, I am a priest and I know my brother priests. Most are good and holy men. While you falsely depict me as damning others; you have judged me and my brother priests. A few have disgraced themselves and have made headlines. The most publicity many of us will ever have will be our obituaries.

You have been away from the Church and yet you think you know the truth about her priests. You should not sin by such presumption.

Promises are made to be kept. No one forced their hand. I am responsible for my priesthood and so are they for theirs.

Would you excuse a married man who fell in love and left his wife for another woman? I can well understand sinfulness, weakness and passion. All priests over time have their heartstrings tugged; but that is when we embrace celibacy as a true sacrifice.

But what punishment is so final and damning for those who leave? A priest who wants to get married may eventually get laicized. He leaves ministry. However, if he marries in the Church then he can return to the sacraments. He can form his children in the Church. He remains a priest forever but in practice is reduced to the lay state. No one says that he must be consigned to hell.

The deposit of faith is made permanent with the death of the last apostle. No new doctrines are invented although there is organic development. Jesus institutes the Catholic Church and establishes a teaching authority. These are the facts as the Church sees them. Anyone can encounter our Lord in Scripture, prayer and in the Church. The hierarchy shepherd the Church and the Magisterium has a charism to preserve the truth in every generation. Over the centuries, the Church discerned that a celibate priesthood best served the needs of God’s people. I believe this is still the case and I trust God’s grace to help priests in being faithful to their commitments. Yes, there have been some bad apples. But you wrong many good priests. About this you should be ashamed and ask pardon.

I will pray for the healing of your hurt and anger. God bless you!

Subsequent Dialogue

GH: That is the Catholic way, to put shame and guilt on people. I should be ashamed?

FATHER JOE: I do not know what you did. If you did something wrong, then yes, you should feel guilty and ashamed of yourself. Feeling guilty is not a bad thing, when you are guilty. Such remorse moves a person to repentance and to reforming his or her life. The trouble today is that many people no longer know shame and people tolerate all sorts of nonsense. Children and young women dress immodestly. People use bad language without so much as saying they are sorry. Couples cohabitate and fornicate and then get mad when the priest challenges them to either separate or get married. Yes, such people should be ashamed of themselves, not simply because they have destroyed their reputations, but because they have dishonored God by their disobedience.

GH: The ones that should be ashamed are those priests I speak of— I have seen repeated sin and hypocrisy and men masquerading as true priests; they are the ones who MOCK the sacrament of reconciliation, Father, not me.

FATHER JOE: Hopefully bad priests do feel sorry for their poor witness. But there are also good priests who should not have their faithfulness mocked or their ministry invalidated by the failures of others. In any case, we are all sinners; there is enough blame to go around. Just because the shepherds sometimes fall short is no license for the sheep to get lost as well.

GH: Yet they will not leave because they are afraid to; so they live a double life.

FATHER JOE: If you know of priests living double-lives then tell the authorities. They will put an end to it. If this is too drastic, then tell a good priest in confidence and ask him to talk to a rascal in the ranks. I have read the riot act to men and some will listen. But as I said, most priests I know are faithful to their promises and ministry.

GH: I am not wronging the good priests. Where did I say that?

FATHER JOE: Look at your words. You lump us all together and contend that there are more bad apples than good. Such has not been my experience and I have been an active priest for 25 years and in the seminary for 8 years before that. On top of it all, you said that the poor witness of priests caused you to leave the Church. That means you saw nothing worthwhile enough in the work and character of good priests to remain in the fold of Christ’s Church.

GH: I said that there are some true and holy priests, yourself one indeed, but I feel they are in the minority.

FATHER JOE: And, while I appreciate the commendation, I sincerely believe good priests are in the majority. Sure the Church went through some hard times. Many priests defected in the 1960′s and 70′s. Some had trouble with the reformed liturgy. Others thought the rule of celibacy was going to be relaxed and they wrongly got ordained with this false expectation. The 1980′s and 90′s brought the almost unbelievable scandal of child abuse. Homeschoolers and other die-hard Catholics kept the faith and now their children are entering the seminaries in droves. This new generation of clergy is very traditional and serious about their commitments. They are joining ministry with those who remained faithful and steadfast in priestly work. Yes, there were some womanizers and misbehaving homosexuals hiding in the ranks; but as they have been identified they have also been expelled from the active presbyterate. Some men with problems, as with a woman or alcohol, have sought counseling, reconciliation and moral reform. This deserves mention in any evaluation of the Church, too. There are real signs of hope, today.

GH: Yes, this is sad. Perhaps, I have been unfortunate enough to have been exposed to far too many of the so called “few bad apples”?

FATHER JOE: This may be the case. Not every diocese is the same and some formation programs were more successful than others.

GH: I don’t see a long line of potential men answering the call either. Why do you suppose that is? There has been much damage done and a great need for healing in the Church. I unfortunately am one of the casualties.

FATHER JOE: I am not sure how you would see the new men coming forward for priestly ministry, given that you have exiled yourself from the Church. Numbers could be better and worldwide; many missionaries are coming from the Third World to reconvert Europe and the West. The dissenting and progressive Catholic families either had no children or a few who were secular and uninterested in vocations. Our more traditional homes are having large families and encouraging their children to be priests and nuns. This is where the next generation of vocations is emerging. The dissenters have contracepted and aborted themselves out of existence. The youth symbolized by the thousands that celebrate World Youth Day with the Pope are serious about their faith. Indeed, they seem more fervent than their parents. The Holy Spirit is not done with the Catholic Church, yet!

GH: I have read in other topics on your blog that you feel such men are “risking their soul to hell.”..You may as well say they will go there.

FATHER JOE: All mortal sin is risking hell. You cannot fault me for a basic teaching of the catechism. But God will be their judge. He will also be the judge of you and me.

GH: It is all semantics and how you word things.

FATHER JOE: No, such should not be the appreciation of Christians. After all, we follow the living Word and his testimony should never be regarded as confusing semantics. Do not be like Pilate who said back to Jesus, “What is truth?” Jesus is the WAY and the TRUTH and the LIFE. It is still the message and person and saving activity of Christ that is proclaimed and made manifest in the Church. The ministry of priests who participate in his high priesthood is still essential to this Good News.

GH: Then you try to put even more Catholic guilt on me because I have walked away from an institution that makes no sense to me anymore. I have not walked away from God, only the Catholic Church. And we all know that the Catholic Church feels those who do that are also— you got it— “risking their souls to hell.”

FATHER JOE: Jesus established his Church as the living sacrament of salvation. It is a new People of God. Our personal salvation comes within this community of faith. That is why Jesus gave us the sacraments. He extends his work through the ministry of priests. I am sorry if I increase your unhappiness. While I cannot control what you would do, my hope is that you would come home to the safe harbor of faith. If anyone hurt or abused you, I am truly sorry. But that is not what the priesthood and the Church are really about. My work as a priest centers upon teaching the truth, celebrating the Eucharist and bringing healing to others. I would have you seek the sacrament of penance and absolution. You would still have a right to be upset with those priests or churchmen who disgraced themselves. But if they were about the work of the devil then who wins if you should be forever alienated from Christ’s Church? Don’t let the devil win in your life. You say that you still have faith in Jesus; then seek out a good priest. Share your whole story and even your anger with him. Return to the sacraments. You might even think that the discipline of compulsory celibacy should be reviewed. But we need humility and acceptance about such things. We need good people to build the Church up again. Maybe God wants you to be one of those people?

GH: The church exerts her absolute power over her priests that leave… even the ones who are laicized; they are not even permitted to read God’s word or act as any type of lay minister. This to me is unjust punishment.

FATHER JOE: Were you a priest? The priesthood is a ministry that belongs to the Church. She has the right and the authority to regulate it as she sees fit. No man was forced to become a priest. Every man who made a perpetual promise of celibacy had six or eight or twelve years of formation to think about it. I believe that God would give the good candidate all the graces he needs to live out this promise. But we are sinners. A few fail. Often they were remiss in their prayer-life and various duties. One person began to mean more to them than the many over which they were given charge. All the Church asks is that we keep our promises. Laicization is the best that the Church can do. It allows a man to rebuild his life while protecting the ministries of the Church from further scandal. The men themselves often ask for it, particularly if they want to remain within the bosom of Mother Church. The restrictions also help to protect the good name and the authority of the priests who keep their promises and remain on the job.

GH: A priest who leaves is a disgrace and an anathema in the eyes of the church. I said the eyes of the Church, NOT God.

FATHER JOE: Here I would disagree. Such a priest made promises or solemn vows. Yes, they were made to the bishop or superior, but also to Almighty God. Breaking our promises to God is a genuine tragedy. God is the one who gives the initial call. The Church later affirms that divine summons.

GH: The analogy that priests are wed to the church is also overused and makes no sense if the church does not in turn use that same analogy with regards to divorce when priests are laicized.

FATHER JOE: Analogies are not exact, but the comparison of things that share some likeness. The marriage analogy would not make married priests impossible. After all, we have some licitly married priests already. The marriage analogy flows from the meaning of the Eucharist. It participates and manifests something of the marriage banquet of heaven. It is not the same as an earthly and carnal marriage which is dissolved by death. The priest participates in the priesthood of Christ who is the groom to his bride, the Church. This relationship is eternal. The new laicization process makes the laicization stages similar to a Church annulment. However, he remains a priest. He does have to argue that he should never have been ordained. Just as the Church does not recognize divorce between married couples, Jesus will never divorce himself from his Church. The laicized priest will always be a priest, even if he can no longer function. A laicized priest who wanted to get married and have sexual relations would still require a permissorial releasing him from his promises.

GH: True, they may receive the sacraments, but why are they not permitted to be a lector or EMC? Divorced people who had their marriages annulled are permitted to be such lay ministers, but laicized priests are not? Again the church exercises her authority with a heavy hand.

FATHER JOE: There is always a scandal when a priest leaves ministry to get married. It advertises hypocrisy and a double-life. A man should not be rewarded for his sins and for breaking his promises. Allowing such a man to continue some form of ministry is also an insult to good men who did what they were supposed to do. Our actions have consequences. If there is any man who should know better, it is the priest! He is held to a higher standard and must pay a more severe price for disobedience. (Having said this, Church law does sometimes permit laicized clergy to function as teachers of religion, although usually in another diocese where their former priestly ministry is not known. Such is up the local bishop’s discretion.)

GH: And the Church wonders why so many Catholics are disgruntled, confused, hurt and angry? We don’t have enough priests to serve anymore because no one wants to join— churches are closing and the remaining priests are burnt out. Something has to give somewhere.

FATHER JOE: You would be ill served by flooding the ranks of the clergy with disobedient priests. The faithful remnant support and love their priests. My little church is filled with such wonderful and happy people. Many of the Masses are so packed that I have people standing up in the back and along the walls. We may not be wealthy, but the faith is alive. I hope and pray that you will know healing and find this joy once more. God bless you!

GH: Father Joe, I want to wish you the very best in your ministry as a priest of the Most High God. I am wounded and confused. I keep in touch with many Catholic friends and read our local Catholic newspapers and unfortunately still am privy to stories of those priests who have left or caused scandal. Sadly it continues. I know there are good and true apostles of our Lord and I will continue to pray for more. God bless you!

BOOK REVIEW: Love is Always

LOVE IS ALWAYS by Michael Miles is a book about a Catholic priest who marries a woman and then seeks to continue his ministry as a priest. While progressives might look upon the story as a challenge to Rome, it is actually an occasion for shame for those involved. Fr. Miles sidesteps as unloving and intolerant those who would criticize his actions. However, what he does is worthy of real rebuke and the publication of his scandal is evidence of his lack of repentance.

He violates his promise of celibacy, made to the bishop, but also by extension to the Church and almighty God.

He made both a priest friend and his bishop into accomplices in his ecclesiastical crime and seriously sinful matter.

While Archbishop Hunthausen was implicated by his toleration of a potential act of schism from the Holy See; his replacement, Bishop Curtiss, erred by his passivity in allowing the disobedient priest to remain in the parish and pretend, poorly it should be added, not to be a priest. It was a sham, pure and simple.

Since he was barred from marriage by his vocation, his bond with Joan was counterfeit, subjecting them both to a situation of sinful cohabitation and fornication. He risked damning, not just himself, but the person he claimed to love.

He sought to hide his transgression from the eyes of Rome, implying of course that the universal Church had no say over him or the enforcement of discipline.

He ingratiated himself and his family upon a parish and the pastoral council, leading to hostility between parishioners and Church authorities; threatening the Catholicity and the souls of the laity.

He reveals himself to be the friend of dissenters. It should be no surprise that he questions Church authority to impose discipline on other matters. He fails to respect celibacy as a special love (all its own), but further, repudiates the teachings against artificial contraception. I would not be surprised if he rejected the view that homosexual attraction as a sexual disorientation, too.

One good thing about the book is that it allows Fr. Miles to burn his bridges behind him. Even if the Church should one day relax the discipline regarding priestly celibacy— such renegades and heretics will never be allowed to function as priests again.

A false compassion and romanticism allowed something to happen that never should have started. Many priests who leave for a woman often get divorced; a sign that one broken promise often leads to others. LOVE IS ALWAYS, not simply until something that looks better comes along.

Sin and evil does not always wear a scary mask. Fornication and rebellion against the Church might be disguised as tenderness and freedom; but, it remains a whirlpool that threatens to draw us into the darkness. Feelings are important, but should never take precedence over human integrity, the value of obedience, and the imposition of the Gospel as proclaimed by the teaching authority of the Church.

When I wrote this book review back in February of 2006, there was an immediate negative reaction.  I was attacked personally:  “WOW! This reviewer is obviously angry about something. Jealous? Hiding something? It has been about 20 years since I read LOVE IS ALWAYS, but I remember it as a wonderfully, heartwarming love story between a man and a woman, and the struggle he had with his church and the vows he took as a priest. The author and his wife were friends of one of my coworkers and I met him and had him sign my copy of the book. Granted, I am not Catholic, so I have a very difficult time understanding why the Roman Catholic church cannot enter the 21st century and allow its priests and nuns to marry. Maybe there would be more young men and women interested in serving the Catholic church if they were allowed to get married? And, maybe there would be less of a problem with priests sexually abusing children if they could come to terms with their own sexuality?”

Am I Angry? Maybe, but definitely upset…why? It has nothing to do with jealousy because I find the man reprehensible. I can appreciate falling in love, but promises are made to be kept. If the priest cannot keep his, then how can we expect our married laity to keep theirs? Adultery is the price we pay and it is a terrible sin. Most priests in the West are celibate, and despite the protestations of malcontents, we are so by choice and by obedience. Spiritually married to the Church, the priest must be a man of truth if he is to preach and witness to the one who is the Way and the Truth and the Life. We all have challenges and crosses to bear. Every vocation and direction in life is an opening of certain doors and the closing of others. This is as it should be.

I love the Church. It upsets me when priests in particular think they can substitute their own notions and practices for Church teachings and fidelity. It upsets me when priests give scandal to the faith and to their vocations by their disobedience and deceit. It upsets me when priests commit serious sexual sins and then urge others to follow them in their corruption.

The fact that such things do not bother certain permissive critics, or that they would mock a priest who tries to be faithful, says volumes about their own beleaguered faith and impoverished character.

But maybe I am too harsh? The critic here admits that she is not Catholic, and yet she presumes to understand how serious a matter this is regarding a priest. The Church teaches that a priest who attempts marriage (without laicization) is not truly married. That means, no matter how affectionate and loving, his relations with a woman would all constitute a matter of fornication, ranked as a mortal sin. As a priest, he cannot pretend in conscience that he does not know Catholic teaching. How can a man say he loves a woman and then to be so selfish as to damn her with himself in the eyes of God and the teaching Church? Sometimes “real” love means letting go of someone…for his or her sake…and for our own sake and the promises we are bound to keep.

Just as married couples make a promise to each other and to God, so too does the priest in embracing celibacy. He vows that this is the particular way that he will love others. His single-hearted love for God flows over into his love and service of God’s people. He surrenders genital love to be a special sign of contradiction for the kingdom…a path praised by St. Paul.

The critic asks, “Maybe there would be more young men and women interested in serving the Catholic Church if they were allowed to get married?”

There might be a few, but we already have thousands of married deacons among our ordained clergy. A married clergy has not resolved shortages of men seeking vocations in the Episcopal and Lutheran churches. Indeed, some of the Methodist seminaries are predominately female. No, the problem is not sex and marriage but faith and courage. God will give the gift of celibacy to those whom he truly calls to the priesthood and religious life in the West. It should be noted that over half of the priests who left ministry to get married are now divorced and in second or third marriages. Once you break a solemn promise to God, it is easier to do it again and again. Currently we are reaping a vocations increase from young men from traditional families. I suspect the future of the Church and the priesthood is looking up. There will be no wide scale relaxation of the discipline of celibacy.

In any case, what upsets me here is not the prospect of married clergy, and we have them in our deacons and in Eastern rite clergy and priests ordained from the Episcopal and Lutheran confessions into the Catholic Church. No, what upsets me is the breaking of promises, lying and the corruption of others.

Finally, the critic asks, “And, maybe there would be less of a problem with priests sexually abusing children if they could come to terms with their own sexuality?”

Certainly priests should come to terms with their sexuality, and do so before taking their vows; however, one can be a celibate and chaste sexual being, without recourse to marriage and sexual congress. What you imply is the fallacy that unless men or women are married, they are necessarily incomplete and unfulfilled. This is not the case. Consecrated celibacy is a wonderful expression of love, witnessed by both our Lord, Jesus Christ, and St. Paul. Catholic clergy who fall are often in the news because our message seems so high and demanding. But, while others may not have so far to fall, and thus do not always make the news, married ministers have their own share of scandals. An evangelical in the news some time back who resigned over gay acts is a case in point. As for child molestation, the terrible truth is that most cases are incestuous and happen in families. A married priesthood might have made the problem far worse, although perhaps less reported.

Despite a few rascals, most priests are good and holy men. They are faithful to their promises, despite the cost.

That is what the priest in the book could not do and so he was a failure and a disgrace. The story might seem romantic and tender. But beyond the subjective elements, it is a terrible tragedy. I am sorry that the critics were unable to see this side of the story and felt compelled to attack me.

Why would you such a critic attempt to psychologize me, the reviewer? Does she know me and my priesthood? I just celebrated 25 years as a priest, and I would not change a thing about the demands of this vocation.

Msgr. William J. Awalt Goes Home to God

Rev. Msgr. William J. Awalt died on Saturday, December 17, 2011 at 11:00 AM at the Byron House on the campus of Our Lady of Mercy Church. Potomac, Maryland.

All funeral services will be at Our Lady of Mercy.

Viewing will be Tuesday, December 20, 2011 from 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM with the Vigil Mass at 7:30 PM.

The Mass of Christian Burial will be Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 10:30 AM.

Business & Trade, Internet Search Engines, China & the Yearning to Be Free

Can or should politicians interfere with Internet search engines, business and trade because of human rights concerns? I recall that several years ago Chris Smith, the New Jersey Republican congressman, came under some heat for wanting an examination and disclosure of Google’s international operations. He was the head of the House subcommittee on Human Rights. Back in February of 2005, he called hearings to investigate the operating procedures of US internet companies in China. It was thought that there could be a serious backlash against companies which capitulated to the demands of the Communist Chinese government. Of course, he was confronting big money and power. Given the indebtedness of the US to the Chinese and the change in administrations, such efforts were an uphill battle. Human rights abuses have continued and sometimes we have not been the friends of freedom. However, Chinese hacking of Google and further US government scrutiny factored in Google’s growing conscience about the matter. Google has certainly had a strained history in China. Everything came to a head in 2010. Along with other US tech companies, Google acknowledged that they had been hacked (email accounts) and that they were no longer willing to censor searches from China. They threatened to pull out. Also, in January of that year, it was reported that the US Congress was going to investigate allegations that the Chinese government used Google’s service to spy on human rights activists. On March 30, 2010, all Google search sites and services were banned in Mainland China. Today, China has their own brand of Google and YouTube.

Chris’ position was vindicated and his fears from five years earlier were fully realized. Chris is a man of conviction who believes in justice and the right to life. He has even been critical of fellow Republicans who made too many compromises. I have not spoken to him in years but he reminds me of Jimmy Stewart’s MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON. Given the current field of candidates, it is too bad that he is not running for President. We all should be concerned about the sanctity of life and human rights. His message was and is a good one: the internet business community should not collaborate with governments that seek to silence and to oppress their people.

Back in 2002, China blocked access to Google from Chinese computers and attempted to create its own search engine, with limited results. In return for access, Google created software to exclude content not approved by the Chinese government. They copied Google and now the Chinese have their own big “censoring” search engine where Big Brother can spy on all. The message was no doubt also sent to Microsoft (MSN) that they were not exempt from such an investigation either. They also censored their search engine for the Chinese and even took down Chinese blogs deemed political by the government. I read of one case where the information provided about the identity of the blogger was used by the Chinese government to prosecute the man responsible. This means that collaboration with the Communists by Internet companies in the US could have led to the imprisonment or even the torture and execution of men and women in China. I would say that was pretty important and given that Chinese slave labor provides many of our goods today; it is doubtful that the business community left to itself would do anything about it.

Congressman Chris Smith made this statement a number of years ago. Are they not still true today, even if the names of some of the players have changed?

CHINESE TRADE: “Through the efforts of the Clinton Administration, we have abandoned the American ideals of freedom and democracy for the sake of marginally cheaper consumer goods from China. We have squandered our patrimony of liberty for the profit of corporations who want access to China’s inexpensive labor market. It is time to do an about face, to condition expanded trade relations upon respect for internationally recognized, fundamental human rights. If we can promote sanctions for video games and rock-and-roll, why can’t we do it to preserve human rights?”

CHINA & GOOGLE: While Google eventually made the morally right decision, it only came after the hacking of their site. “It is astounding that Google, whose corporate philosophy is ‘don’t be evil,’ would enable evil by cooperating with China’s censorship policies just to make a buck. China’s policy of cutting off the free flow of information is prohibitive for the growth of democracy and the rule of law. Many Chinese have suffered imprisonment and torture in the service of truth – and now Google is collaborating with their persecutors.”

GW’s old man, the first George Bush, would agree with arguments that it is better to allow unrestricted business cooperation with China. Although, it seems that we have become as dependent upon their goods as they are with our money. Many of the social changes about which we hoped have failed to materialize. As for myself, I would also argue for political and economic relations with them; but always with strings attached. Our treatment of Taiwan after the Nixon/Ford Administrations has always bothered me. As for Hong Kong, the British made a treaty with a China that no longer existed; should they not have been given their sovereignty? But those are my pet notions. While our country is no paragon of virtue, nations and the world community do have an obligation to insure that businesses and organizations do not trample upon basic human rights. Collaboration with evil makes one an accomplice, for which God will judge each and every one of us. Utilitarian arguments are outrightly rejected by the Catholic Church.

I recall the arguments about opening Western businesses to China when the first President Bush gave most favored status to China; and certainly no one wants to isolate China from the rest of the world. However, economics is the only wedge short of military intervention that we have with the Communists. Do we sacrifice human rights at the altar of consumerism and materialism, either of the Socialist or Capitalist variety?

This growing middle-class in China is still less than one percent of the population. Most of the wealth generated goes to a few hundred families among the upper Communist hierarchy. Middle-class in China translates to making between $3,000 to $12,000 a year. That would rate as the poverty level in the U.S. Many of these will themselves have a servant or maid that is paid $50 a month. Peasants represent 70% of the population of 1.3 billion, earning about $100 a year!

Guess what? Finding computers in schools and coffee-houses, the majority of the bloggers and those questioning Chinese politics are from the poor! Religious persecution is still a predominate cause for internet censorship and prosecution. This includes the Chinese who reject the Patriotic Catholic Church and accept the authority of the Pope. The internet is giving people in China a voice to speak out about oppression. Big business left to its own devices does not care about this; even many in government do not. People who embrace the basic human values in government and business must work together, not only against oppression in lands like China, but also against the passivity and blindness of so many in the West.

I generally believe that government should not interfere with business; however, I qualify this with the exception of human rights. A few years ago when human fetal material was added to a popular shampoo as “animal protein”– individuals, organizations and government got involved. We have fair labor laws that try to preserve safety and dignity to workers. Products produced by companies must face safety requirements. Again and again, when it comes to human rights, governments and other organizations must get involved.

China might be on the other side of the globe. But they are people too with basic human rights and dignity. We should not enable, either through inactivity or secondary collaboration, those who would silence the voice of the poor, those yearning to be free.

A television news report announced that because of contracts with companies like Matel, 90% of all toys sold in the US are manufactured in China. Few Chinese children will ever play with such toys. Catalogues from Autom Catholic Religious Goods advertise inexpensive articles, almost all from China. However, all of it is reserved to foreign export and domestic circulation would be regarded a crime. Heck, even my DVD Player has “Made in China” on the back. Dollar Stores came into existence because of this trade. Other nations could step in, but there is no underestimating its vast scope. I wrote a few years ago that while it would cost us, the US could flex its business muscle for the sake of human rights. But each year the interdependence becomes more pervasive. The day may have come when such action would be too costly. As one critic remarked, “It is too late, the Chinese already own us.”

To illustrate how things have so rapidly changed, it was only in the 1980′s that the last television set wholly manufactured in the US was produced (ZENITH). Japan, Hong Kong, Korea and now also China produces them for us. When it came to clothing, many of us always looked for the “Union Label” and took pride in wearing shirts, pants, and dresses manufactured in the US. But the cost disparity became too much for the poor and the average working man. This started happening in the 1960′s. I recall my first concession to the trend when my mother bought me a new coat for school. It was the mid-1960′s and the coat’s label read, “This coat is manufactured by the free people of the Republic of SOUTH VIETNAM.” Evidently it was an effort to support our allies economically while in conflict with the Communist North. I wore that coat with pride, even though I was only in the fourth grade, because (in my mind) it symbolized freedom and justice.

By the way, there was a television expose some years ago about Walmart where reporters followed shirts and pants from China sweatshops to the US. They found that they were sold at Walmart carrying the designation, “Made in the U.S.A.” When challenged about this, the executives at Walmart said that there was nothing deceptive for while the clothes were of Chinese origin, the attached label was indeed, made in the Unites States. Not deceptive? The label? And these are the people who are supposed to stand up for human rights and justice?

The dilemma about the internet is just one important wrinkle in this situation: how far do you collaborate with thugs to make a buck? Where arguments might be made that trade helps the poor and middle class of China; for an American or Western company to assist in the restriction of information and free speech of Chinese dissidents is something else. And to hand over information that leads to the arrest, imprisonment, and maybe torture of such people is the worst case scenario.

I am not utterly opposed to trade with China. But I did have problems with Google installing censorship software at the behest of the Chinese government that blocked religious sites like the Vatican and Free the Fathers and blogs where men and women yearning to be free speak out.

The Chinese tried to create their own search engine back in 2002 and made a mess of things. But today it is up and running. We helped them in this. We will have to answer for it.

For the record, I should stress that I am not an isolationist. It may be that we must bargain with the devil every day. We can hope that our relationships with the Red Chinese and Moslem extremists will make a difference; but we should never let down our guard and directly cooperate in human oppression. Communism is not dead, and instances of free enterprise can disappear tomorrow if the dragon awakens. Some of our so-called allies in the war against terror are themselves corrupt and oppress minorities, women and others. Is the pacified Westernized Islam that we see here at home the true faith of Mohammed; or is the genuine face really the Hamas and the extremism that we see in the Middle East and now parts of Africa and Asia?

Trade with China will not in itself prevent a new Cold War. Indeed, their military buildup is largely financed with our own money. Oil money in the Middle East can also translate into a fearful New World. I am not sure what we can do about much of this. Such questions will not be resolved by bloggers, but at least we have the freedom to speak, which some do not have. And Western and American companies should not help to silence voices. I only wish people in all walks of life would more effectively engage these issues and politicians would devise a clear plan about where our policies are taking us. We tend to be so short-sighted, instead of looking to the horizon.

Back when Google was much in the news, I wrote: “I guess it all depends upon how seriously Google cooperates with the Red Chinese government. While I am all for the censorship of pornography sites, the protection of children, and the prosecution of those who criminally exploit others; the Communists would use political and religious censorship to oppress their own people. Should Google cooperate in human oppression? What if the censorship software identifies dissidents who could suffer arrest or murder? People still disappear in China. Hackers might find their way around censorship software, but most poor Chinese blog operators and general users only have elementary computer skills. The issue is bigger than Google. If the poor Chinese can get past the national portal to the internet, they deserve protection within the international community. The Web can be a great tool for democracy; or we can ruin it like we did so much else of the media.”

Recent Links of Interest

THE PEACE OF MARY OR ROAD RAGE?

‘Our Lady’ Seeks To Curb Road Rage On 95

wamu.org – On the side of Interstate 95 in northern Maryland, travelers zooming down the highway toward the Delaware border may catch a glimpse of a shrine to “Our Lady of the Highways.”

PROFITS OR PROPHECY & FAITH?

Black Friday: Thousands petition Target to ‘Save Thanksgiving’

latimesblogs.latimes.com – Target is the target of an online petition urging them to resist the urge to open the doors earlier than ever this year — midnight — in a bid to compete for scarce holiday dollars.

Lots of stores are beginning Black Friday sales at midnight on Thanksgiving Day and Walmart is opening its doors at 10 PM. Just as with Sunday business hours, workers miss church services and family time because of the demands of work. Convenience for consumers is stripping God of his due and damaging the rights of people compelled to work all week long. Days of rest and the sabbath should be respected. Maybe it is time to restore the blue laws? When I was a boy, employment was limited on Sundays… mostly a few drug stores and police/fire/emergency services. Was it really so bad?

How much do you want to bet that there will be a lot more people lined up for Black Friday sales in the stores than there were for Thanksgiving Day Mass at church?

An estimated 152 million of the US population of 312 million (which includes babies and the infirmed) are estimated to take advantage of Black Friday. Goodness, I think I really was the only one who stayed home. The news said that electronic items were big sellers. $200 notebook computers and $200 40 inch tvs. I think Target or Walmart offered a 50 plus inch tv for $400. If they can still make a profit, how much scalping was going on earlier? Happy Holidays everybody, oops, I mean have a joyous and holy Advent and Christmas!

ARE WE ASHAMED OF CHRIST?

Cross removed at base in Afghanistan

http://www.politico.com – The incident has prompted outrage from some American service members stationed there.

Happy Thanksgiving Everybody… and never forget the one who is the object of our prayerful thanks!

THE YOUTH ARE OUR HOPE OF TOMORROW?

Flash mob in Silver Spring ROB 7-Eleven: 50 teens storm convenience store in Maryland

http://www.dailymail.co.uk – A group of about 50 teenagers stormed the convenience store in Silver Spring, Maryland at around 11.20pm this past Saturday, the second such incident in recent months.

‎50 teens robbing a Silver Spring convenience store makes international news… ah, our youth… the hope of tomorrow? Bah humbug! (In declaring war against God and religion, our society has also failed to transmit meaningful values and virtue!)

An Exorcism Story

A few recent articles have gone too far and have revealed the identity of the possessed boy. There will be nothing of that here. Indeed, I wrote one so-called investigative journalist and pleaded with him to remove the name from his article reprinted to the World Wide Web. If this man wanted to be known, he himself would have told his story. Past journalists and authors had the information at hand, but they were true gentlemen and respected the rights of personal privacy. The Church has also kept the record secret. The Jesuits spoke and the journal kept has come to light. This rendition is based upon that journal and the recollections of the server involved with the Washington exorcism effort.

The News Breaks

The Washington Post article in 1949 proclaims, “Priest Frees 14-Year-Old Boy Reported Held in Devil’s Grip.” Almost immediately the story was picked up by the other news services and magazines. Who would think that such a thing could still happen, and in all places, modern-day America? The story has been told and retold.

Unable to get access to archdiocesan records, William Peter Blatty produced his fictionalized account that resulted in a blockbuster movie of 1974. One priest lamented at the time, “It is tragic that the devil should prove so popular with people when they seem so disinterested in God.” The conclusion of the film was most lamentable in that the young priest exchanges his body for that of the child as a host to the demon and then throws himself from the window. If the story had been true, one could logically contend that the devil was really after the priest the entire time. In other words, the devil actually won and the rituals and intercession of the Catholic Church were proven impotent. Fortunately, such portrayals are restricted to the movies and the real story shows that the power of Christ and of his Church can still vanquish the demonic.

How It Really Started

Unlike the movie, the story surrounded a young boy who was born June 1, 1935. He and his parents lived just outside Washington, D.C. in Cottage City, not far from Mount Rainier, Maryland. (Some sources claim a popular Mount Ranier location as the site of the boy’s home. The house at this location has been torn down and a dance studio is now on the site. The diary gives the Cottage City location, instead. I do not feel it appropriate to give the full address. However, since Catholics in the past identified themselves by their parishes, we might still regard this as the Mount Ranier Case. The boy converted to the Catholic faith and claimed St. James Parish as his own in Mount Ranier.) The first signs of trouble started on January 15, 1949. He was thirteen years old. While his parents were out that evening, he and his grandmother heard a dripping sound in the house. It only lasted for a brief period and then a picture of Jesus on the wall began to shake as if something had bumped into it. When his parents had returned home, a definite scratching noise could be heard under the floorboards next to his grandmother’s bed. This sound of scratching was repeated each night from about 7:00 PM until midnight. Logically, the family figured that there must be a rodent problem. An exterminator was called. However, despite taking up the floorboards and wall panels to spread poison, the sound did not cease. Indeed, the disturbing noises became worse.

Some ten days afterwards the noises ceased and all believed the rodent to be dead. Nevertheless, the boy was under the impression that he could still hear the scratching noises. Three days later the sound became audible to the rest of the family again.

The exorcist writes:

“When the sound became audible again, it was no longer in the upstairs bedroom but had moved downstairs to the boy’s bedroom. It was heard as the sound of squeaking shoes along the bed and was heard only at night when the boy went to bed. The squeaking sound continued for six nights, on the sixth night scratching again was audible.”

It appears that the invitation for this spiritual invasion was inadvertently initiated through a favorite aunt of the boy. She had died in St. Louis two weeks prior to the first registered phenomena.

“It developed that the aunt of the boy and his parents had used a Ouija board, and this probably gave the devil his first entrance.”

Many religious authorities are convinced that such a so-called toy actually offers an invitation to evil spirits. Aunt Tillie had been an enthusiast of spiritualism. Suspecting something supernatural in the sound of marching feet, the boy’s mother asked (according to the exorcist’s journal):

“‘Is that you Aunt Tillie?’ She obtained no verbal reply and continued: (evidently aware of the methods employed by spiritualists) ‘If this is you, knock three times.’ There were waves of air striking the grandmother, mother and boy, and three distinct knocks were heard on the floor. The mother asked again: ‘If you are Tillie, tell me positively by knocking four times.’ Four distinct knocks were heard.”

As time went by, it became evident that strange occurrences and sounds seemed to follow the boy.

“An orange and a pear flew across the entire room where he was standing.”

“The kitchen table was upset without any movement on the boy’s part.”

“Milk and food were thrown off the table and stove.”

“The breadboard was thrown onto the floor.”

“Outside the kitchen a coat on its hanger flew across the room.”

“A Bible was thrown directly at the foot of the boy but did not injure him in any way.”

“His desk at school moved about on the floor similar to the planchette on an Ouija board.” (This latter evidence of telekinesis forced the boy to quit school because of embarrassment.)

Things became increasingly worse at home.

“On one occasion the coverlet of the bed was pulled out from under the mattress and the edges stood up above the surface of the bed in a curled form as though held up with starch. When the bystanders touched the bedspread, the sides fell back to normal position.”

It was also stated that “At first everybody, including the boy, took it as a kind of joke, but it became more than a joke.” Soon thereafter, “the word LOUIS was written in deep red on the boy’s ribs,” seeming to indicate that some invisible force desired that the boy travel to St. Louis where his favorite aunt lived.

The Lutheran Minister

His mother called a minister of her faith, a local Lutheran pastor. He was dubious about the whole matter. Although suspicious of the chest message, written upside down as if self-inflicted, he requested that the family come to his home. What happened next struck him as defying any natural explanation. His offer to keep the boy over at his home was accepted. It was the 17th of February in 1949. At about 10:00 PM, they decided to go to bed. The room contained twin beds. After about ten minutes, the boy’s bed began to vibrate. The headboard was banging against the frame.

The minister reported:

“It made a lot of racket. I thought he was shaking it but he was making no visible movement.”

Seeking a practical remedy to the situation, he placed the boy in a large overstuffed chair and sat beside him. Slowly the chair began to tilt upon its side and the minister had to grab it before it fell over. The good pastor insisted that there was no way the boy could be pushing the chair over since his legs were thoroughly tucked beneath him. He then placed the boy on a scatter rug upon the floor. Certainly, this would resolve the matter for the night. But no, the rug “moved slowly until it got to the wall and then it stopped.” The poor clergyman was utterly befuddled.

“I remember thinking he must be doing it himself but I realized later that would have been impossible. There was no movement of his body.”

The boy was delivered home the next day. Because of his Protestant theology, the minister sought a natural explanation. Unable to come up with one, he categorized the whole incident under unknown forces.

From Shrink to Witchdoctor to Priest

A psychiatrist from Georgetown University was called in but refusing to believe in the phenomena he simply reported that the boy was normal but “somewhat high-strung.” The family complicated matters further by calling a spiritualist. However, his incantations for dispelling spirits failed. Indeed, the situation became graver.

Having a relative married to a Catholic, the boy’s mother described the situation to him. His response was “If what you say is true, then you should consult a priest.” The family called the nearby parish, St. James Catholic Church. The boy’s father made an appointment to talk to one of the priests. The clergyman gave him various sacramentals: holy water, blessed candles, and some recommended prayers.

“Once when the mother had sprinkled the holy water around the room, she placed the bottle on a dresser and it was picked up by the spirit and smashed. When one of the candles was lighted, the flame shot up to the ceiling, and the candle was extinguished for fear that the house might be set on fire.”

The suggested prayers seemed to make the phenomena worse. Deciding to call back the priest, the clergyman heard a great crashing sound. The mother of the boy told him that the telephone table she was using had broken into a hundred pieces.

This anxious situation refused to end and matters grew tenser. The priest, Fr. E. Albert Hughes, went to the chancellor of the archdiocese. He was warned to move slowly and not to leap to rash judgments. The young priest explained that he had done as much. After a meeting with the archbishop, Most Reverend Patrick A. O’Boyle, he was authorized to initiate the exorcisms. Fr. Hughes resisted, hoping that an older and more experienced man might be chosen instead.

He “understood that this should be done by a very holy man because the devil is wont to expose the sins of the priest; so the Father went to Baltimore and made a general confession. But the devil is the father of lies, and there is a theological opinion that he is unable to reveal sins that have been forgiven.”

The archbishop insisted, the young priest had to offer the ritual. It would prove a terrible miscalculation. Between February 27 and March 4, the boy was moved to Georgetown University Hospital. A young man and altar server (George Chapman) who was known for his abilities in high school football was drafted by the priest to assist him. This young man grew up and became a leader in the local Knights of Columbus. A good friend, he passed away on January 9, 2009. He told me that he had a terrible struggle to hold the possessed boy down. The boy could spit across the room with deadly accuracy. George said the saliva was like acid and he saw it literally dissolve the priest’s book. At one point George lost his patience and even lightly slugged the other boy to keep him under control. He saw himself as the popular priest’s body guard. The priest made him go to confession and pledged him not to tell his mother and friends the details of the encounters. They tied the hands and feet of the boy to the bedposts. He reacted violently to the ritual. Loose items in the room crashed to the floor. The bed shook uncontrollably. Strenuously the large server sought to hold the bed down. The victim was a small boy and yet he possessed incredible strength. The priest warned his young assistant not to enter into dialogue with the boy, only to give the required responses to the ritual words of the priest. Strange words came forth from the restrained boy, supposedly Aramaic, a form of ancient Hebrew. Previously the boy had taunted the priest in Latin. Objects were thrown around the room. The boy growled like an inhuman animal. Then it happened. Somehow the boy had gotten a hand free of the restraints. He secretly tore through the heavy mattress and ripped out a metal spring. The server responded to the words uttered by Fr. Hughes in the ritual. At the conclusion of the Lord’s Prayer, the boy attacked the priest and tore a gash into the cleric’s arm from his shoulder to his wrist. Blood exploded over everything! The ritual prayer book was caked in the priest’s blood! He screamed out! The exorcism had ended in failure. The priest’s life was saved by the doctors and his arm had a long track of a hundred plus stitches. He would have lingering problems with the arm and it would visibly drag at the consecration during Masses.

As an interesting aside, the young server in this episode was struck in the eye by the afflicted boy. He would develop a black eye and it was joked that maybe the priest had socked him. When the priest mysteriously left the parish, only he knew the true reason. The good priest would need to recuperate from his terrible encounter and injury. After this event, colleagues of the priest say that Fr. Hughes was never quite the same. He became quieter. He was intensely reserved about what had happened. One remarked that it was as if he was a haunted man. He died in 1980.

The sources are clear about this next point.

“Up to this time everything had been obsession, that is, exterior to the boy, but as soon as the exorcisms began, real possession began.”

They Go to Saint Louis

The boy expressed a desire to go to St. Louis, and since they had relatives they could visit there, the family left with the hope of leaving their troubles behind them. Unfortunately, the problem with the boy did not improve.

“Different displays were witnessed by two aunts of the boy, four uncles and four cousins. The printing ‘No School’ was seen by four people. The swaying of the mattress, the upsetting of bedroom furniture and the scratching on the mattress were observed by the entire group . . . Phenomena indicated that the spirit was not the devil but the soul of deceased Tillie. The spirit confirmed again to all present that she was Tillie by moving a heavy bed two or three feet with not one of the bystanders near the bed.”

Again a priest was consulted from the closest Catholic parish. Fr. Raymond J. Bishop, S.J., a teacher at the university came to the house on March 9.

He “blessed the entire house, and used a special blessing in the boy’s room and on his bed. A second-class relic of St. Margaret Mary was safety-pinned to the extreme border of the pillow. Shortly after the boy retired, the mattress on his bed began to move back and forth in the direction of the bed uprights. The boy lay perfectly still, and did not exert any physical effort. The movement in one direction did not exceed more than three inches; the action was intermittent and completely subsided after a period of approximately fifteen minutes.”

The next day, similar things happened. The relic was thrown to the floor.

“The safety pin was open but no human hand had touched the relic. The boy started up in fright when the relic was thrown down.”

Exorcism & Baptism

The next day, Friday, March 11, the priest who would perform the exorcisms visited the family. Fr. Bishop had in turn contacted Fr. William S. Bowdern, S.J. from St. Francis Xavier Church. He was shaken by what he observed. He brought additional relics and a crucifix.

“Shortly after the boy had retired at 11:00 PM, he called downstairs that he had been frightened by a strong force that had thrown some object against the mirror in his bedroom. With safety pin opened, the relic of St. Margaret Mary had been thrown against the mirror and the sound was like a pellet striking the glass. Another occurrence was a cross mark scratched on the boy’s left, outer forearm. The pain was similar to that produced by a scratch of a thorn. The cross remained evident for approximately forty-five minutes.”

The family telephoned the priest in Washington, and after a few days, the priest in St. Louis brought the case to his archbishop (Archbishop Ritter) and was authorized to continue with the exorcisms.

Artist’s Conception of Devil as the Beast

The symptoms of possession seemed to get worse and not better with the new exorcism attempts beginning on March 16.

“The seizures took place in the evening when the boy went to bed and would last from 8:00 to 12 Midnight or 1:00 AM, intermittently, and then the boy would go off into a perfectly normal sleep for nine or ten hours.”

It was decided a few days later to recite the prayers earlier so that everyone could get more sleep. Nevertheless, the seizures were unabated and started about 9:00 at night and lasted until 2:00 or 3:00 AM.

Sometimes as many as ten people were required to hold the boy during seizures. He would tear the sheets and pillows to shreds, as well as the shirts and undershirts of those who restrained him. He was utterly wild, hitting and kicking. He even broke the nose of one of the assisting Jesuit students. One incident had him scratching the exorcist’s arm so badly that he could not lift it for a number of days.

“Coming out of a seizure he would complain of feeling very hot and would ask for a glass of water. After one of the seizures in the beginning, he said that the evil spirit seems to carry him down into a pit about two hundred feet deep where there were intense heat and vile evil spirits. In the beginning also he seemed to be in a long, dark cave with a tiny bit of light at the far end; as the exorcism progressed, the lighted end seemed to grow larger and larger, in one of the exorcisms, the spirit, in the body of the boy, pointed to one of the priests who were assisting and said: ‘What is the use of you being here; you will be with me in hell in 1957.’”

A few days passed. The boy asked to be baptized. It should be noted that his father had been baptized a Catholic and that some of his cousins in St. Louis were Catholics. Once consulted, the parents were agreeable. The boy was instructed and preparations were made to baptize him in church.

“On the appointed morning he rose, took a shower, ate his usual breakfast and set out for the church in a car driven by his uncle. Just before reaching the church the boy grabbed his uncle by the neck and said: ‘You S.O.B., you think I am going to be baptized, but you are going to be fooled.’ The uncle was just able to seize the emergency brake and avert a collision by an inch. It was realized that to baptize the boy in the church would create a scene, so he was taken to the third floor of the rectory, which stands in back of the church but faces Lindell Boulevard. Every time he was asked: ‘Do you renounce Satan and all his works?’ he would go into a rage. Only after several hours of repetition was the boy able to reply: ‘I do renounce Satan and all his works.’ Then it required several more hours to get the water poured on the boy’s head.”

After the rite of initiation, things became calm and quiet for a couple days. However, then the demonic business started up again and worse than before. Some of the phenomenon was quite peculiar.

“One was the amount of spittle that the boy could discharge: there would be half-a-pint at one time. At times he would ask for a glass of water and it would be given to him, although it was known what would happen. It would be spat back on the bystanders. While the priest read the exorcisms, two others would hold a towel in front of his face to protect his glasses, but it was useless; the spittle would go under the towel, over the towel or around the towel and strike directly on the priest’s glasses, and the boy’s eyes would be closed the whole time. Another phenomenon was excessive urination. During the seizures the boy would utter the vilest obscenities, curses, blasphemies and ribald songs, all in a high falsetto voice that was off key.”

It is noted that at one stage, the exorcist had to protect himself with a pillow, for the boy’s head moved like a cobra, aiming non-stop with spittle for his face.

First Communion

The exorcist and the family returned to the Washington, D.C. area. The boy’s parents were at wits end and were suffering from sleep deprivation. Fr. Hughes tried to get the boy committed to a sanatorium or hospital in the Washington-Baltimore area, but none would take him. It was decided to take him to the Alexian Brothers Hospital in St. Louis. He was given instructions in preparation for his first communion. The hope was that receiving the Eucharist might bring the possession to an end.

“When the time came, it was impossible to get the Host near his tongue, but finally, after several hours, they succeeded in placing it on his tongue and three times he spat it out. Eventually success was achieved. This was on April 2, the first Saturday of the month, a day dedicated to Our Lady of Fatima. The title was explained to the boy and he showed great interest. But the seizures continued.”

“What is Your NAME?”

During the exorcism, the priest asked for the first time its name.

“What is your name and when will you depart?” The response was simply “Shut up, shut up.” Later, “in answer to the question of his name, the words, ‘Hell, Spirit,’ appeared in red letters on the boy’s chest. In reply to the question of departure, red numbers: 4, 8, 10, 16, some Roman numerals appeared on the boy’s body. He said: ‘I will not go until a certain word is pronounced and this boy will never say it.’ There also appeared a red arrow extending from the boy’s throat to the bottom of his abdomen, and it was thought that the spirit might go out by the way of urine, as has happened in some cases.”

An appendage to the diary tells us that “the boy would greet the priests with filthy, foul obscenities, fluently answer the exorcist’s questions in Latin, a language he had never studied.” One day the boy was sitting in bed reading about Our Lady of Fatima with the book on his knees when he was thrown into a seizure. He threw the book across the room. On another occasion, he was given a glass of milk and threw that across the room. On one of the final days, a Jesuit scholastic gave the boy a plate of chipped beef. He grabbed the plate, jumped to one side of the room, and threatened to brain anyone approaching him. While one assistant approached him from one side, the scholastic crawled under the bed to seize him. The boy threw and smashed the dish of food against the wall.

Liberation at Last

Despite hope that the possession would end during Holy Week, it continued through Easter Sunday with particularly violent seizures. The worst day of all was April 18, Easter Monday. The exorcist and his assistants were becoming completely discouraged.

“Suddenly, at 11:00 PM, a new voice was heard from the boy; a beautiful, rich, deep bass voice exclaimed: ‘Satan, Satan, go, now, now, now to the pit where you belong, in the name of DOMINUS (the Lord).’ That was the word and at that moment the boy felt a tearing sensation in his stomach, relaxed and lay perfectly quiet. He described what has happened. He saw a brilliant figure, visible from the waist up, clothed in a close-fitting white garment which had the appearance of scales; the hair was long and flowing in a wind; the right hand held something like a flaming sword or light pointing downward. It was St. Michael the Archangel. When he spoke, the evil spirit rebelled against going until the word ‘Dominus’ was spoken and at this moment the boy felt the tearing sensation in his stomach. Then at some distance down he saw some evil spirits standing at the mouth of a cave from which flames issued. Then the spirits reluctantly withdrew into the cave, the opening closed and across it appeared the word: ‘Spite.’ Thus the possession was ended.”

Closing Remarks

The diary tells us that the exorcist and his assistants “observed some severe fasting, mindful of the admonition of Christ that some devils can be driven out only by prayer and fasting.” There had been at least twenty exorcisms performed. One Jesuit involved remarked: “Only by examining the record after possession was ended, was it possible to see the meaning of the replies (the red marks on the boy’s body). The numbers may have been the days on which certain spirits departed from the boy, if there were actually more than one in his body.”

The Jesuit priest, Fr. Bowdern, passed away in 1983 and his assistant and then scholastic, Fr. Walter Halloran died from cancer March 1, 2005. The young server who tried to help Fr. Hughes desired to remain anonymous while he was alive. An interesting side note, George (the server) told me that when the boy returned to Washington, he could not remember the active possession episodes. The possessed man is still living and there has been no trouble since. He married and had a nice family. Life went on.

A FEW ADDENDUM NEWSPAPER CITATIONS

An aunt of the boy said in a New York Times article from August 1972:

(Upon the boy’s visit to her home) “All of a sudden the mattress starts going, just raised up in the air, and down, up and down, and my sister hollered for me, . . . oh I tell you that mattress just raised both of us right up in the air . . . . I happened to have a table against the wall with a vase of flowers on it and I got out but as my nephew tried to leave, that table actually flew in front of the door and would not let him out . . . .” In the same article it quotes what a Jesuit priest confided to him, “I assure you, Gene — I saw this with my own eyes — the boy did not tear the Ritual book, he dissolved it! The book vaporized into confetti and fell in small pieces to the floor!”

The staff writer Jeremiah O’Leary reported in The Evening Star that the boy spoke an unknown language that sounded similar to Hebrew.

“A professor of Oriental languages from Catholic University was called in and he was shocked to discover the words coming from the boy’s mouth were in Aramaic, the language spoken in Palestine in Jesus’ day.”

RECOMMENDED READING:

Allen, Thomas B. POSSESSED. New York: Doubleday, 1993.

Exploitation & Where Do We Really Find Evil?

After reading the sensational article “Possessed,” by Thomas B. Allen in June 1993’s edition of Washingtonian Magazine, many people were eager to buy the book of the same title released in July of that year. Having read the book, it must be admitted that there are elements to the tale that seem to validate Christian faith in God and in his mercy; however, at the same time I fear that it’s telling will surrender true religion to mockery and to superstition. No suggestion is made in the article and none in the book until the very end, that there might still be more to the story than the supernatural. However, even if it should be the case, books and films tend to give more emphasis to the demonic than to the divine. Producers and writers work ever harder to shock their patrons, an audience made increasingly insensitive to violence and to “things that go bump in the night.” We want to be entertained and producers of horror films and writers know all too well how to excite the masses with fear and gross happenings. Even the 1973 film, The Exorcist, based on William Peter Blatty’s book, opted to highlight vulgar language, Eucharistic desecration, obscene gestures, fanciful special effects, and finally the death and failure of the two priests. I would suspect that the battle between good and evil is more frequently invisible to the movie camera and ignored by novelists seeking to sell books. Indeed, just as the case here began as one of demonic obsession and only later became possession when the exorcisms were attempted; might a heightened concentration upon this issue similarly endanger people? Such worries me in my own retelling, although I offer the corrective that Christ is really the one with all the power. Satan is pathetic by comparison to our Lord. The end of the story, the real story, is what makes a big difference. God’s grace is victorious over sin. Evil is repulsed. Having said this, while it is true that the devil should not become a scapegoat for all human ills, it is almost impossible to believe that he is not involved with the atrocities at home and abroad. In language, popular music, drug experiences, new cult religions, escalating crime, immoral lifestyles, terrorism, wars and genocide, abortion, euthanasia, etc., Satan is exerting an obsessive influence, numbing consciences and helping to distort values.

“Okay, maybe this story should not have been told?”

Sometimes the devil is incredibly subtle; at other times he shocks us by his audacity and malice. If people want to be frightened, then here is the real thing of which to be afraid; but, only if we separate ourselves by sin from Christ and the sacraments. Most of us, probably all of us after the age of reason, are no longer bystanders to the devil’s malevolence, but in every sin, large and small, accomplices. God’s grace can turn this around, if we really want Satan exorcised from our society and world.

Prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly hosts, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan, and all the evil spirits, who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

Recommended Books

An Exorcist Tells His Story by Gabriele Amorth. (Ignatius Press, 1999).

An Exorcist: More Stories by Gabriele Amorth. (Ignatius Press, 2002).

Angels and Demons by Peter J. Kreeft. (Ignatius Press, 1995).

Ghosts and Poltergeists by Herbert Thurston, S.J. (H. Regnery Company, 1954).