Church – Page 9 – Convert Journal

Father Mychal Judge, OFM, fallen hero

Sunday, September 11, 2011 A.D. 1 Comment

Today marks the 10th anniversary of 9/11. Almost 3,000 souls left this world that day by this tragedy. Of those, the very first certified death was Father Mychal Judge, a 68 year old Franciscan priest. Father Judge served as Chaplain of the NYFD.

When the news of the attack reached him, Father Judge rushed to the site and was met by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani who asked him to pray for the victims. Father immediately administered last rites to the dying. He then entered the WTC North Tower lobby to give aid and offer prayers.

As the South Tower suddenly collapsed, debris crashed through the North Tower lobby windows striking Father Judge, ending his earthly pilgrimage as he prayed aloud.

Father Robert Emmet (Mychal) Judge – Catholic priest, first responder and hero.

Sadly, Mayor Bloomberg’s memorial today has no place for God or heroes. It will be a strictly secular affair excluding any remembrance by Father Judge’s brother priests and their counterparts in other religions. Maybe there will be some awkward “moments of silence,” whose purpose will remain vague. Bloomberg is also excluding responders from speaking, so men like Father Judge are silenced on 2 counts. I suppose all the available time and space was reserved for the very important people – politicians and “community leaders.” They were a big help on 9/11.

The rest of us will remember and pray for all who died that day, the victims in the towers, at other locations and the many brave responders, including Father Judge.

God our Father,
Your power brings us to birth,
Your providence guides our lives,
and by Your command we return to dust.

Lord, those who die still live in Your presence,
their lives change but do not end.
I pray in hope for my family,
relatives and friends,
and for all the dead known to You alone.

In company with Christ,
Who died and now lives,
may they rejoice in Your kingdom,
where all our tears are wiped away.
Unite us together again in one family,
to sing Your praise forever and ever.

Amen.

Filed Under: Church

Civil vs. divine law

Tuesday, July 26, 2011 A.D. 4 Comments

The Irish Prime Minister, Minister for Justice and Minister for Children are backing legislation to require priests to report confessions of child abuse to the authorities. Failure to report these confessions would land priests in prison for up to 5 years. Emboldened by this, an Australian senator is proposing much the same.

Such efforts have only one purpose and it is not the protection of children. It is quite simply an attack on the Church. These politicians grab headlines, get to appear tough on crime, get to appear protective of children, keep alive the sexual abuse scandal and put the Church into a losing position.

No faithful priest would ever break the seal of the confessional. Doing so would lead to sanctions and excommunication. Priests have been martyred again and again for refusing civil authorities in the past and, if worse comes to worse, will suffer again to protect this sacrament.

Were these politicians actually interested in protecting children, they might take an interest in all the other institutions and organizations which so far have not had anything like the attention directed at the Catholic Church. That is NOT in any way to excuse the actions of those in our numbers who committed such deplorable crimes. Yet, for all the focus and attention on the Catholic Church, studies show it involved in only a small part (less than 0.03% of the perpetrators in the US) of this tragedy. Where is the attention on the home, schools, youth sports and non-Catholic communities?

The liberal media can be counted on to assist such political efforts. They are never a fan of the Church, unless it fits their agenda – such as to support our social justice teaching (which they often distort) or position on capital punishment. Usually, we make headlines today for our failures decades ago, made to sound quite new while such crimes actually being committed right now elsewhere are ignored. I have never seen any coverage of the extensive steps we take today to protect children. In the US, those are quite effective (at a significant cost and sometimes draconian measures). Others could learn a lot from us.

Politicians capable of rational thought and who actually cared about children realize that the confessional seal is helpful. First, this is probably the only place the penitent will face his crimes and the terrible harm done. Second, the priest will probably be the only voice they hear telling them to make amends by turning themselves in. Third, were the Church to agree to cooperate with such laws (it never will), does anyone really think that child abusers would confess their crimes before they are caught? They are disordered but not stupid.

So far, such nonsense has not been proposed in the US. We have had cases of the authorities bugging the confessional but such evidence has been ultimately found to be non-admissible. Ultimately found to be non-admissible because it usually has to go through multiple appeals until that point is reached. In other words, lower courts alarmingly saw it as legal.

While this particular attack is aimed (1) only at the Catholic Church, (2) only at the confessional seal and (3) only for child abuse crimes – do not think for a moment that it would stop there. Were this highly flawed attack to actually work, in relatively little time other crimes would be added… murder, rape, everything else. New attacks would spring from this success on all of Christianity.

Political attacks on the Church are not limited to the confessional. When the world ignored the need for organized adoptions, the Catholic Church stepped-in . Now, Catholic adoption agencies have had to close because we can not morally place children into unnatural and disordered environments. Likewise, Catholic hospitals are at risk because they can not kill innocent, unborn children.

Even our ability to conduct legal weddings is at risk. In states where the myth of “gay marriage” is legally recognized, (temporary, weak protections notwithstanding) we may eventually loose legal marriages for “discriminating” against those wishing to enter into these unnatural unions. This has happened before in communist Poland where people were routinely married for real in the Church and by civil authorities for legal reasons.

Eventually, the Church may be persecuted for “hate speech” and alleged “civil rights” violations for our “intolerance” of sinful homosexual acts, the “rights” of mothers to kill their unborn children or the “rights” of adult children to kill (euthanize) their parents.

This is not just a problem for the Catholic Church either. Other Christian communities and other religions will face similar pressure to conform – or else. Communist China is very aggressive in this way. The visible Catholic churches are under control of the Patriotic Catholic Association which is controlled by the government. They do not recognize the primacy of the Pope and use all means necessary to FORCE bishops to (illicitly) ordain others of the state’s choosing which do not result in valid holy orders. There is an underground Catholic Church which is estimated to be twice as large as the visible one in which the faithful must take serious risks. Hopefully it will not come to that in Ireland, Australia or here for “upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.”

UPDATE: Father Finigan also discusses this topic in a few posts:

Filed Under: Church, essay, politics, sacraments

Father Corapi

Tuesday, June 28, 2011 A.D. Leave a Comment

I have never been a close follower of Father John Corapi, but I have seen his conversion story and a few other videos. Very impressive. A man clearly touched by the Holy Spirit and called to the priesthood in a remarkable way.

It was some surprise then, when he was accused in March of misconduct. Accused, only accused. I have no idea if there is any foundation to the accusations and apparently no one else does either.

I will say that I am angry at priests who commit crimes against others, particularly children (not what Father Corapi was accused of, BTW) and bring scandal to the Church instituted by our dear Lord. I also appreciate that we have no perfect mechanism to process such accusations but do the best we can, sometimes failing to protect our own – in effect, asking them to “take one for the team.”

Father Longenecker noted the injustices placed upon some of the priests in the messy Philadelphia situation. One priest claims the help he gave to a very troubled kid years ago has morphed into a money grab. A priest who chaperoned a theme park outing asked the kids to put his cell number in their phones in case of emergency. The mother of one of the girls took its presence as proof of inappropriate contact. Another mother claims a hug eagerly exchanged by her child with a priest after Mass (in public) became somehow erotic. These priests are now suspended, collateral damage today caused by inexcusable, immoral acts of a few priests decades ago.

Some troubling facts have come to light in Father Corapi’s situation. Proving nothing conclusively, many have risen strongly to his defense. Others have gone the opposite way. Many in the blogosphere have written articles and the response has been devisive.

There is only one “winner” in this situation, one who is thrilled and delighted by this story and its repercussions — Satan. First, this has been a horrible and painful experience for Father Corapi. Faithful Catholics have engaged in very non-charitable words against each other. The Church, the Body of Christ has suffered from the scandal, as she always does in these situations.

The solution is time for the wounds to heal and prayer.

Hail, Holy Queen, Mother of Mercy,
our Life, our Sweetness, and our Hope.
To Thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve.
To Thee do we send up our sighs mourning
and weeping in this valley of tears.
Turn then, most gracious Advocate,
Thine Eyes of Mercy toward us,
and after this our exile show us the
Blessed Fruit of thy Womb, Jesus.
O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary.
Pray for us O Holy Mother of God
That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.

Filed Under: Church

Is Hell empty?

Tuesday, June 21, 2011 A.D. 11 Comments

One of the people I highly respect is Father Robert Barron. He produces videos on Catholicism that are faithful, informative and interesting. Fr. Barron has short, topical videos on his YouTube channel. He has also produced longer presentations for TV broadcast. In a few months, Fr. Barron will release the eagerly awaited Catholicism Project.

I have learned a lot from Fr. Barron and have always found his teaching to be rock-solid. I was shocked then, when I heard his comments on Is Hell Crowded or Empty?

The Church teaches that hell is real. It has never taught that any person in particular has ended-up there, even Judas (likely, but not certain). For that matter, the Church teaches that only a relatively few Saints in particular are known to be in heaven. Where everyone else, who ever lived, landed is not definitively taught, not in particular or (debatable) in general. We are free to have differing opinions on the general proportion of heaven vs. hell. Mine is opposite that of Fr. Barron.

This subject is visited quite often in Holy Scripture as well as in Sacred Tradition. While heaven is offered to all, many have rejected it by rejecting God. We do not know the relative proportion of those in hell vs. heaven, but I believe that most faithful Catholics would say hell is well populated.

It seems to me this is similar to the question of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary before 1950. In that year, Pope Pius XII infallibly defined this doctrine in Munificentissimus Deus. At that time, questions were being raised for this long-held Catholic belief backed by Sacred Tradition (but not Holy Scripture). The case for hell being far from empty seems even stronger, although not (yet) infallibly declared.

In his piece, Father Barron begins by mentioning Rob Bell, an Evangelical mega-church pastor who wrote Love Wins, a very non-evangelical view that presents a Universalist, “everyone is saved” position. Father compares this with Origen of Alexandria (around 200AD) who took a similar position (that was condemned by the Church).

Moving to modern times, Fr. Barron notes that 20th century Protestant theologian Karl Barth held views similar to Bell and Origen on this topic. Father did not agree with Barth, but agreed with his contemporary – Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar who believed there is a reasonable hope that all people will be saved.

With all due respect to Balthasar and Fr. Barron, this is where I disagree. Certainly I share the hope that all people will accept the salvation paid for by Our Lord on Calvary. That they will be saved, almost all, the majority, a significant portion… I am sadly doubtful. It is obvious in today’s world how many people reject God. God, through His Son, has mercifully given us a chance for eternal life – not a guarantee (or near gaurantee).

Bell and Origen suggest heresy. Balthasar’s view misses that, but not by much.

If these few academics were correct, then heaven is ours regardless of what we do. We would be free to reject God’s will, ignore His Church, believe whatever we wish, live in sin or perhaps even worship Satan. While these things would affect our life here, we would still have a “reasonable hope of salvation.” That friends, is hogwash!

Part of the reason this alarms me is because I sense that this is exactly what many people believe. IF there is a God and IF heaven exists, since He is merciful I will be assured of my place there. In the mean time, there is no reason to order my life in any way other than that which pleases me the most. Only I am important. God’s will is irrevelant.

Father Barron himself points out how this view differs from Saint Augustine of Hippo and Saint Thomas Acquinas. Both of these Doctors of the Catholic Church believed that most people will be damned. Father also acknowledges the “dark view” of hell Jesus often spoke of, for example:

Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many. How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life. And those who find it are few.

Matthew 7:13-14

Clear enough to me! It was also clear enough to many Church Fathers revered for trustworthy teaching of the faith and who now pray for us in Heaven:

The greater part of men choose to be damned rather than to love Almighty God.

Saint Alphonsus Maria Liguori (Doctor of the Church)

On the threshing floor, few are the grains carried into the barns, but high are the piles of chaff burned with fire.

Pope Saint Gregory the Great (Doctor of the Church)

It is certain that few are saved.

Saint Augustine (Doctor of the Church)

Out of one hundred thousand sinners who continue in sin until death, scarcely one will be saved.

Saint Jerome (Doctor of the Church)

What I am about to tell you is very terrible, yet I will not conceal it from you. Out of this thickly populated city with its thousands of inhabitants, not one hundred people will be saved. I even doubt whether there will be as many as that!

St. John Chrysostom (Doctor of the Church)

I do not speak rashly, but as I feel and think. I do not think that many priests are saved, but that those who perish are far more numerous.

also St. John Chrysostom (Doctor of the Church)

Christ’s flock is called “little” (Luke 12:32) in comparison with the greater number of the reprobates.

Saint Bede the Venerable (Doctor of the Church)

The greater part of men will set no value on the blood of Christ, and will go on offending Him.

Saint Isidore of Seville (Doctor of the Church)
(also my confirmation Saint)

How few the elect are may be understood from the multitude being cast out.

Saint Hilary of Pointiers (Doctor of the Church)

The majority of men shall not see God, excepting those who live justly, purified by righteousness and by every other virtue.

Saint Justin Martyr

There are a select few who are saved.

Saint Thomas Aquinas (Doctor of the Church)

The number of the elect is so small – so small – that, were we to know how small it is, we would faint away with grief: one here and there, scattered up and down the world!

Saint Louis Marie de Montfort

The Catechism also addresses this in some detail in paragraphs 1021 through 1060. For example:

We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: “He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.” Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren. To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”

CCC 1033

Michael Voris at RealCatholicTV did an excellent piece on this topic entitled How Many Will be Saved?, from which the above Saint quotes were drawn. John Salza at Scripture Catholic also has a very good page on hell.

My opinion: hell is quite full, filling fast, but with plenty of space to accommodate everyone. Satan has a chair for each of us and hopes to fill it. Many seats will be claimed.

UPDATES:

Bryan Cross gives an excellent analysis of this topic at Called to Communion
Piers Paul Read addresses shortcomings of Balthasar and his selective read of Lumen Gentium
Mark Shea provides a good analysis of what the Church teaches definitively
Michael Voris addresses the topic in this video .

Filed Under: Church, essay, faith

Hijacking CST

Tuesday, June 14, 2011 A.D. 2 Comments

It is contemptible and sad when people (particularly Catholics) “hijack” Catholic Social Teaching for their own ends, typically political. Sometimes this is done in a cold and calculating way. Other times it is because they confuse the ideology of their political party with true Catholic teaching (or worse, place it above the teaching of Christ’s true Church). Sometimes it is just ignorance.

“Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence” is often attributed to Napoleon. Heinlein’s Razor updates that to “never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don’t rule out malice.” It is unclear which quote fits better in this case, but I note that the parties involved are a hodgepodge of professors.

Recently a group of Catholic university professors wrote an “open letter” to Speaker (US House of Representatives) John Boehner, a (Republican) Catholic. The thrust of their letter was to enlighten him that any reductions in federal government programs that aid the poor would be contrary to Catholic Social Teaching. Of course, the “open” letter was not for him at all but to American Catholics with the subtext that Republicans act contrary to Catholic values – a very partisan agenda promoted at the expense of true Catholic teaching.

Yes, Republicans sometimes act in opposition to CST. Their support of the death penalty immediately comes to mind (an unjust death about once per week). On the other hand, Democrats give unwavering support to the murder of innocent unborn children (which we hold to be an intrinsic evil, resulting in an unjust death every 20 to 30 seconds). Neither political party lines up perfectly with Catholic teaching.

The issue at hand is – can a self-appointed “liberal magisterium” convince Catholics, for their own partisan purposes, that any reduction in federal programs is contrary to Catholic teaching? I sure hope not and that we see this for the corruption of Church teaching that it is.

The real Magisterium, the one instituted by Jesus and protected by the Holy Spirit, reminds us of our obligation to love each other. In that, we each have a PERSONAL obligation to the poor and vulnerable in what we call the “preferential option for the poor.” We are to share the gifts of time, talent and treasure loaned to us by God with others in need. Catholic charities have always had this focus and do more in this regard than any other charity on the planet.

The “liberal magisterium” views a large, central government (and through it the forced redistribution of wealth as determined by others – particularly them) as the solution. We could split hairs all day on semantics, but that is socialism and it is condemned by the true Magisterium. In the very least, it is liberation theology which our Holy Father and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith have also condemned (see this, for example) for the same reasons. Not only is it outside of CST, it is contrary to it – raising issues of free will, worker rights to their wages, subsidiarity and more.

John Kennedy noted that “the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.” Ronald Reagan was more direct – “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”

Let’s consider the credibility of the letter organizers. They presumably have done this out of deep concern for the reflection of Catholic values in governmental policy. How many in this group wrote letters to Nancy Pelosi (Democrat Catholic) when she led the House? Did they ever take issue with her rock-solid support, expansion and promotion of abortion? Did they raise a peep at any point in the continual attack on the family posed by supporters of immoral unions? Unlike the bogus issue the professors are raising that will mislead Catholics ahead of the next election, these serious issues are very real (supported by one political party in particular).

Maybe, we should just expect this once again in preparation for the upcoming presidential election. Last time, a half-dozen fake Catholic groups suddenly appeared (with websites and promotion) to give cover to politicians and mislead Catholics. Immediately after the election they disappeared but were very effective. Would it surprise you to learn that this deception was all tied to one party? This could just be more of the same – and as offensive and immoral as the last round.

Some excellent analysis of this issue has been published. In particular, I recommend that you take a look at the the following: