essay – Page 14 – Convert Journal

Apostles: hot and cold

Tuesday, August 16, 2011 A.D. Leave a Comment

Father Joseph, one of the excellent priests at my parish, offers a kind of Bible study on Monday evenings. Instead of studying a Bible book, we look at the upcoming readings for the following Sunday, how they relate together, historical background, and so on. The group is small so everyone interacts more than in some larger classes.

One of the things I have noticed again and again is how “dense” the apostles were. One moment, they seem to have great clarity as to who exactly Jesus is. The next moment, they appear unsure. Our Lord often rebukes them for their lack of faith. A recent Gospel reading (Matthew 14:22-33) when Jesus walked on water is but one of many examples.

This almost schizophrenic nature of the Apostles continues right through our Lord’s Passion. One moment professing undying devotion to the Lord, the next (as if they were someone else) denying Him. Reading the Good News is like a roller coaster ride.

Finally at Pentecost, the Apostles truly and permanently understand all that they have seen and heard. The Holy Spirit fills them with grace so that they may fulfill Jesus’ command to “Go into the whole world and proclaim the gospel to every creature.” The Apostles after Pentecost were significantly different than their pre-Pentecost, version 1.0 selves.

Please understand, I have the utmost respect for the Apostles – after all, they were chosen by God! I see rather, parallels to ourselves in them. We are also called to holiness and like the pre-Pentecost Apostles, we too struggle in our journey of conversion. Sometimes we make great strides. Other times we slide backward a little.

Through the spiritual struggles of the Apostles, God speaks to us in communicating the Gospel. We identify with their their conversion and their faith. After the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Apostles are prototypical Saints. They were the first “torch bearers” of our faith passed through the millennia all the way to today’s Catholic bishops. We too are called to be saints and to be more than “followers” – to be disciples.

The eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had ordered them. When they saw him, they worshiped, but they doubted. Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”

Matthew 28:16-20

When Jesus said to Peter “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?” He is talking to us too.

Filed Under: essay, faith

Myth: Whore of Babylon

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 A.D. 15 Comments

The Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon. So says one bizarre, outrageous myth common in some Christian communities. The roots of this come from twisted interpretations of Holy Scripture:

Then one of the seven angels who were holding the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come here. I will show you the judgment on the great harlot who lives near the many waters. The kings of the earth have had intercourse with her, and the inhabitants of the earth became drunk on the wine of her harlotry.” Then he carried me away in spirit to a deserted place where I saw a woman seated on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names, with seven heads and ten horns. The woman was wearing purple and scarlet and adorned with gold, precious stones, and pearls. She held in her hand a gold cup that was filled with the abominable and sordid deeds of her harlotry. On her forehead was written a name, which is a mystery, “Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth.” I saw that the woman was drunk on the blood of the holy ones and on the blood of the witnesses to Jesus. When I saw her I was greatly amazed.

Revelation 17:1-6

The relatively clear books of the Bible are interpreted in hugely different ways by various Christian communities. This is an obvious problem for those professing sola scriptura (the false belief that the Bible is EXCLUSIVELY the authoritative word of God and that it is somehow “self-interpreting”). The symbolism of Revelation makes personal, non-authoritative interpretation that much more difficult.

So, who is the harlot referred to in Revelation? Probably pagan Rome or apostate Jerusalem. That is what St. John may have envisioned when he wrote it and that is historically the view of Catholic (and many Protestant) theologians. (See the Further Reading notes below for a thorough exploration.)

To entertain that it could be the Catholic Church, one would have to believe that somehow this chapter slipped by Holy Mother Church’s attention when she canonized the Bible, that Sacred Tradition vanished and her authority ended at that moment. Also, that her own Apostle (and a first bishop) John indicts the Church created by Jesus himself in favor of “churches” to be created against unity 1,400 years later.

Those who believe that are indeed susceptible to wild tales spun by others (the Jack Chick tracts come to mind), while denying the need or existence of any true authority to interpret the Bible (unlike every other word ever written). None-the-less, these many clever story tellers implore you to interpret it THEIR way (which they insist is correct). Unfortunately, good people can be misled.

Unlike other communities, the Holy Bible comes from the Catholic Church… the Church does not come from the Bible. Remember that the Catholic Church canonized the Bible in the first place, a process that took about 400 years. What is and is not in the Bible, the order of the books, the numbering of the verses – everything. The Bible is the fruit of the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church. Of course, the New Testament writers themselves were Catholic as were all the Church fathers and Saints. Only the Church could select the content infallibly under the protection of the Holy Spirit who remains with her today and to the end of time. The Bible was never intended to replace Sacred Tradition or the authority of the Church. That notion did not exist for the first 1,000 years after the Bible was canonized. It was invented only then by self-appointed “reformers.”

Who started this Catholic church is the whore of Babylon myth? A Catholic man who broke his vows to the Church and God. A man who, alone and on his own authority, denied Sacred Tradition and the authority given by Jesus to the Church, with whom He is inseparable. A man who changed Holy Scripture to suit his evolving personal beliefs. A man who shattered Christian unity leading many to schism and heresy, who was followed by more men who built-on that with their own adjustments. The man was Martin Luther.

It was Luther who first made the association of the Catholic Church to harlot of Babylon and the Pope to the Antichrist in his angry attack On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church. Luther declares “I now know of a certainty that the papacy is the kingdom of Babylon.” (See also the Lutheran Book of Concord which continues this theme.)

The irony of this is that when Martin Luther removed (by first demoting) Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1 & 2 Maccabees from his Bible, he wanted to go further but his political support base objected. On the chopping block were parts of Daniel, Esther, and all of James, Jude and Revelation. Yes – Revelation, the same book he drew on to attack the one true Church. Of Revelation he said that he could “in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it.” The complete Bible, unlike Martin Luther’s subset, remains unchanged from Saint Jerome’s Latin Vulgate translation in 397AD.

Today, the “whore of Babylon” myth is perpetuated and expanded (out of ignorance) by some Christian communities other than Lutherans. As you can tell, I am “down on the reformers” (particularly Luther) because of the long-lasting and deep damage they did to the Body of Christ. My view of Protestants, these many generations later, is however different than my view of their various founders. I was Protestant of a particular denomination because I was born into it, studied it, believed it. We were taught little about what other Christians believed. The same is true of many others in my denomination. The same is true of many in other denominations. The same is true of many Catholics. Once divided along these many branches, it is very difficult to restore the unity Jesus wants for His Church.

My children, I will be with you only a little while longer. You will look for me, and as I told the Jews, ‘Where I go you cannot come,’ so now I say it to you. I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another. This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”

John 13:33-35

No, the Catholic Church is not the whore of Babylon nor is the Holy Father, the successor in the Chair of St. Peter, the Antichrist. This is simply an anti-Catholic attack on the Church. Attacks we expect, but it is particularly sad coming from our brothers and sisters in Christ.

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

I had a dream

Tuesday, July 5, 2011 A.D. Leave a Comment

The first thing that jumps to my mind when I hear “I have/had a dream” is Martin Luther King’s famous speech on the National Mall in 1963. In that noble dream, Dr. King foresaw a time when people were no longer prejudged by their race.

The second thing that jumps to my mind is all the times I have heard it from family and friends. “I had a dream” is implicitly followed by “that I just have to tell you about.” These are almost always bizarre, usually with one odd and impossible scene following another.

We probably do not remember most of our dreams. When I wake-up and recall a dream, it is usually of the boring, make-work kind. Dreams where I need to get something done, deadlines have to be met, time organized, plans executed, etc. I don’t mention these to others because they are not interesting, even to me.

I am not a psychologist, but on occasion have wondered how our sleeping minds create dreams. I assume that the plots come, in part, from concerns we have in life. The sets probably come from our extended environment, our homes, our work places, television and movies we have seen, and our “mind’s eye” of things we have read. The cast almost always features ourselves, often our family, sometimes our friends and pets, and other characters that we synthesize from all of these.

Last night I had a dream (I will get to that in a moment) which got me thinking about another possible ingredient – what is in our heart. It is possible that our dreams give us an objective glimpse at the current state of our souls. I believe that sometimes, dreams are one mechanism by which the Holy Spirit talks to us. There are plenty examples of that in Holy Scripture.

Last Friday was the Solemnity of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus followed by the Immaculate Heart of Mary on Saturday. I read meditations and thought about the nature of Jesus and Mary, trying to better understand their holy natures in comparison to my fallen one.

I also thought about the hearts of Saints and those on a possible path to Sainthood such as Blessed Teresa of Calcutta and Blessed John Paul II. What kind of dreams did these people have?

Sometimes in the past, I may have dreamed of something like winning the lottery (unlikely as I have never bought a ticket!). In a dream I could explore how people would react and how I would spend the money. I would have sudden fame, people would give me special deference as they often do towards the extremely wealthy and the money might be spent on fine but unnecessary luxuries. In short, pride and greed. What might Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II have dreamt if their dreams gave them wealth? Somehow, I do not think their dreams would have been like mine at all.

In my dream last night, I was presented with a moral choice. Of course, as in life, no one said “George, you have a moral choice,” but an immoral opportunity arose. I found myself accepting that opportunity without giving it a lot of thought at first. As I proceeded, but before anything “happened,” it occurred to me that it was gravely sinful. I specifically remember that and deciding to proceed anyway. I even remember thinking that I will have to confess it and when and where to go to confession. Mercifully at that point I woke up.

A flood of emotions came to me as I laid in bed. Even though it was a dream, I was disappointed in myself, felt shameful, and very remorseful. Most of all I was mortified that I could act and think like this (it being a dream not withstanding). I could commit a mortal sin, clear and unambiguous. The matter was grave, I had sufficient reflection to completely understand the sinfulness, and I purposefully decided to go ahead anyway.

Since this was only a dream, I lacked the full capacity for free will of my waking self. No mortal sin was actually committed. Yet, I can not help feeling it was sinful none-the-less and that a small, hidden part of me was complicit. All I could do was say an act of contrition.

Why did I have a dream like that? Upon reflection, I think it may have been the Holy Spirit showing me the stark difference in my heart and that of Jesus and Mary. A lesson and ultimately a blessing to ask for and accept their grace to reject sin.

It also occurs to me, the fullness of God’s mercy in preparing our souls to be received into heaven after death. That is, the role of purgatory and its place in His plan seems a little clearer to me today.

Filed Under: essay, sin

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 .