The Inmates Are In Charge of the Asylum

Jesus Christ did some very strange things after his crucifixion and resurrection.  Good Friday and Easter Sunday meant that Jesus had defeated Satan, sin and death (I Cor 15:55-57).  The gates of heaven were flung open to sinning and condemned human beings.  The war was over and life had won over death.

However, unlike victors in earthly wars, Jesus left the enemy in place.  He had put a leash on the Adversary, on Satan, but Satan is still allowed to tempt us, to try to lure us away from life to death.  On top of that, Jesus left our sinful nature intact.  We are just as prone to sin as we were before His Victory on the Cross.  We are still born with original sin.  In fact, we are born into a world that is in complete enmity against God (James 4:4).  Jesus defeated the world, but then left it completely intact and His followers in it living side by side with the enemy.

Then, to top it off, Jesus went to heaven and left us in this mess!  Of course, He did not leave us alone.  He sent the Holy Spirit to live within us and guide us.  But unlike our enemy, Satan, who forces himself upon us whether we want it or not, we have to make a conscious effort, every moment of our lives, to walk with the Holy Spirit while at the same time struggling with our still very intact sinful nature and living in a sinful world.  Our every step is a constant, conscious struggle, and if we turn away from the Holy Spirit, Satan is right there to lure us to sin and death.

Father John Zuhlsdorf Bans Me From His Blog

A few weeks ago I wrote about a cyber encounter with Father John Zuhlsdorf, which you can read HERE. As you will see from the post, Father Zuhlsdorf wrote a post in which he stated his disagreement with official Catholic church teaching that the Ordinary Form and the Extraordinary Form of the Mass are two forms of the same rite.  Father Z says that while he accepts that juridically the two Masses may be one rite, he says that "liturgically and theologically" they are two separate rites.

Pope Benedict XVI declared that the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms are one rite in his Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum dated July 7, 2007, and he restated this teaching again in his letter to the bishops accompanying Summorum Pontificum. This same teaching is stated once again in the further instructions released by the Vatican in 2011.

I commented on Father Z's blog post that he was in disagreement with Pope Benedict XVI and put screen shots of my comments to Father Z in my post. It can be plainly seen that I was very respectful. However, Father Zuhlsdorf had what he would call a "spittle flecked nutty" and called me nasty. Father Z then blocked my home IP address and from that time on, whenever I would try to view his blog from my home IP address, I would get only a blank screen. I have had no further encounters with Father Zuhlsdorf in any way since that time.

Today when I tried to view Father Zuhlsdorf's website, I received a screen with the word "BANNED!", as shown above. It seems pretty obvious that somewhere along the way, Father Zuhlsdorf has read my blog posts, and he has had another spittle flecked nutty, to use his words, and this time it was on steroids. I am sure that Father Z will eventually see this post as well, so I am directing the rest of my post directly to him.

Father Zuhlsdorf, you are showing that you have a massive ego problem. Nothing I wrote either on your blog or on my own blog was in any way disrespectful or "nasty" as you claim. I did not even give my own opinion. I used the words of Pope Benedict XVI, whom you claim to honor and respect. You became upset because I showed that you were wrong, and your ego went into overdrive. May I remind you, Father Zuhlsdorf, that as a Catholic priest, your mission is to serve God's people. As Christ, the Good Shepherd, laid down his life for His sheep, so you are to do. And part of laying down your life for the sheep means getting rid of your ego. I can only say that you have failed miserably in your reaction to me, and by literally banning me from your site, you have only escalated your failure.

One of the basic characteristics of a shepherd must be to love the people entrusted to him, even as he loves Christ whom he serves. “Feed my sheep”, says Christ to Peter, and now, at this moment, he says it to me as well. Feeding means loving, and loving also means being ready to suffer. Loving means giving the sheep what is truly good, the nourishment of God’s truth, of God’s word, the nourishment of his presence, which he gives us in the Blessed Sacrament.

Pope Benedict XVI

Why I Read So Few Catholic Blogs

Credit:  www.pinterest.com

I had an interesting run in with a Catholic blogger recently. The blogger is Paul Anthony Melanson and he has a blog entitled, "La Salette Journey." He wrote a post criticizing Pope Francis for his "Urbi et Orbi" message. His post is entitled, "Does Pope Francis offer an authentic Gospel or the 'Social Gospel?' " [HERE].  His answer is that Pope Francis is preaching only a social gospel, and not telling the world about spiritual salvation. Therefore, Pope Francis is preaching a false gospel. Melanson quotes extensively from Dietrich von Hildebrand to show just how wrong Pope Francis is.

It is interesting that Melanson gives no direct quotes from Pope Francis' Urbi et Orbi message. He does link to another Catholic blogger, "The Radical Catholic", who is also harshly critical of Pope Francis and - surprise, surprise! - "The Radical Catholic" also does not give any direct quotes from Pope Francis. Neither of these two Catholic bloggers even give any links so that we can read for ourselves the message from the Holy Father.  These bloggers offer only harsh criticism and condemnation.

Since these two self-proclaimed models of Catholicism refuse to play by any rules of fairness, I will make up for their deficiencies. You can go HERE to read the full Urbi et Orbi message from Pope Francis.

ISIS in Iraq
Credit:  rt.com

In his message, Pope Francis said, "Jesus is the salvation for every person and for every people" and then went on to list several hot-spots in the world such as Iraq and Syria "who for too long now have suffered the effects of ongoing conflict, and who, together with those belonging to other ethnic and religious groups, are suffering a brutal persecution." The Holy Father prayed for "all who suffer in Ukraine, and grant that their beloved land may overcome tensions, conquer hatred and violence, and set out on a new journey of fraternity and reconciliation."

The Holy Father prayed: 

May Christ the Savior give peace to Nigeria, where (even in these hours) more blood is being shed and too many people are unjustly deprived of their possessions, held as hostages or killed. I invoke peace also on the other parts of the African continent, thinking especially of Libya, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and various regions of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I beseech all who have political responsibility to commit themselves through dialogue to overcoming differences and to building a lasting, fraternal coexistence.

Victims of terrorism in Nigeria
Credit:  www.thecuttingedgenews.com

Pope Francis mentioned the suffering of millions of children in the world:

The Child Jesus. My thoughts turn to all those children today who are killed and ill-treated, be they infants killed in the womb, deprived of that generous love of their parents and then buried in the egoism of a culture that does not love life; be they children displaced due to war and persecution, abused and taken advantage of before our very eyes and our complicit silence.

Further:

I think also of those infants massacred in bomb attacks, also those where the Son of God was born. Even today, their impotent silence cries out under the sword of so many Herods. On their blood stands the shadow of contemporary Herods.

Truly there are so many tears this Christmas, together with the tears of the Infant Jesus.

Credit:  womennet.am

Pope Francis concludes his message by saying:

Dear brothers and sisters, may the Holy Spirit today enlighten our hearts, that we may recognize in the Infant Jesus, born in Bethlehem of the Virgin Mary, the salvation given by God to each one of us, to each man and woman and to all the peoples of the earth.

May the power of Christ, which brings freedom and service, be felt in so many hearts afflicted by war, persecution and slavery. May this divine power, by its meekness, take away the hardness of heart of so many men and women immersed in worldliness and indifference, the globalization of indifference. May his redeeming strength transform arms into plowshares, destruction into creativity, hatred into love and tenderness.

Then we will be able to cry out with joy: "Our eyes have seen your salvation"

Both Melanson and "The Radical Catholic" are very upset that Pope Francis would equate "salvation" with being concerned and praying for an end to the the physical suffering of so many millions around the world. From the Radical Catholic:

While I wish to distract neither from the horrible plight of so many suffering around the world today nor from the genuineness of the Holy Father's sentiments, I find myself wondering: Did Christ come to save us from these things? Did He come to save us from poverty, famine, persecution and suffering? Did He come in the glory of His power to establish a kingdom in which there is no want, no calumny, no corruption? Is this the reason for His appearance two millennia ago? Is this the meaning of His Advent?

I can only wonder:  are these two bloggers for real?  Did they never read Matthew 25 - "whatsoever you do to the least of my brethren, you do to me?"  Christ talks about clothing the naked, feeding the starving, caring for the poor.  He said that those who don't do these things will not be in the Kingdom of God.  A Christian never separates concern for the spiritual state of persons from concern for their physical state.  It is just as wrong to not care for people physically as it is to neglect them spiritually.  

I wrote a comment to Melanson's blog in which I said, "I guess Dr. Hildebrand wouldn't like Pope Benedict XVI either. What up with these popes trying to give comfort to the world?! That is something Jesus would never do."  

I then linked to the 2012 "Urbi et Orbi" message from Pope Benedict XVI [HERE].  In this message, Pope Benedict mentions the tremendous suffering of people in various countries, such as Syria and "the Land where the Redeemer was born", North Africa, "the vast continent of Asia", Mali, Nigeria, the "Democratic Republic of Congo" and Kenya.  Pope Benedict ended his message with:

Dear brothers and sisters! Kindness and truth, justice and peace have met; they have become incarnate in the child born of Mary in Bethlehem. That child is the Son of God; he is God appearing in history. His birth is a flowering of new life for all humanity. May every land become a good earth which receives and brings forth kindness and truth, justice and peace.

Eerie how similar these messages are, and yet Melanson has the audacity to say in his comment to me:

Actually, Dr. Hildebrand would have no problem with Pope Benedict XVI. Pope Benedict never advanced a Social Gospel. Read your own link, if you are capable. Nowhere does Benedict hold Christ as the Savior from poverty and all the ills of society.

Oh really?  What do you call this:

May peace spring up on the vast continent of Asia. May the Child Jesus look graciously on the many peoples who dwell in those lands and, in a special way, upon all those who believe in him. May the King of Peace turn his gaze to the new leaders of the People’s Republic of China for the high task which awaits them. I express my hope that, in fulfilling this task, they will esteem the contribution of the religions, in respect for each, in such a way that they can help to build a fraternal society for the benefit of that noble People and of the whole world.

May the Birth of Christ favour the return of peace in Mali and that of concord in Nigeria, where savage acts of terrorism continue to reap victims, particularly among Christians. May the Redeemer bring help and comfort to the refugees from the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo, and grant peace to Kenya, where brutal attacks have struck the civilian population and places of worship.

May the Child Jesus bless the great numbers of the faithful who celebrate him in Latin America. May he increase their human and Christian virtues, sustain all those forced to leave behind their families and their land, and confirm government leaders in their commitment to development and fighting crime.

It is obvious that these bloggers hear only what they want to hear and read only what they want to read.  They certainly don't let reality intrude.

I wrote back to Melanson quoting from James 2:16:

If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it?

I cannot remember my entire comment because Melanson refused to post it.  Instead, he alluded to it by writing this:

Since "Catholic in Brooklyn" doesn't care to engage in honest dialogue, I won't be publishing her comments.

She left another comment asserting that men are primarily interested in the food for the body. She misses the point.

Lucifer was the first preacher of the Social Gospel. He said to Jesus, "Turn these stones into bread."

And how did Jesus respond? With the most succinct rebuttal of the Social Gospel: That man does not live by bread alone but by the Word of God.

I guess Melanson's idea of dialogue is that he talks and unless you agree with him - shut up.

I have a question for Melanson, "The Radical Catholic" and all the other radical traditionalists who see Pope Francis as basically a heretic.  Do they honestly believe that Pope Francis is not preaching the message of salvation to the world? Pope Francis wrote a book-length apostolic exhortation which is entirely concerned with preaching the Gospel to the world.  From that document:

Lastly, we cannot forget that evangelization is first and foremost about preaching the Gospel to those who do not know Jesus Christ or who have always rejected him. Many of these are quietly seeking God, led by a yearning to see his face, even in countries of ancient Christian tradition. All of them have a right to receive the Gospel. Christians have the duty to proclaim the Gospel without excluding anyone. Instead of seeming to impose new obligations, they should appear as people who wish to share their joy, who point to a horizon of beauty and who invite others to a delicious banquet. It is not by proselytizing that the Church grows, but “by attraction”.

John Paul II asked us to recognize that “there must be no lessening of the impetus to preach the Gospel” to those who are far from Christ, “because this is the first task of the Church”. Indeed, “today missionary activity still represents the greatest challenge for the Church” and “the missionary task must remain foremost”. What would happen if we were to take these words seriously? We would realize that missionary outreach is paradigmatic for all the Church’s activity. Along these lines the Latin American bishops stated that we “cannot passively and calmly wait in our church buildings”; we need to move “from a pastoral ministry of mere conservation to a decidedly missionary pastoral ministry”. This task continues to be a source of immense joy for the Church: “Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance” (Lk 15:7).” (14-15)

Melason, "The Radical Catholic" and others would do well to read carefully the following statement from Pope Francis:

“I prefer a Church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets, rather than a Church which is unhealthy from being confined and from clinging to its own security. I do not want a Church concerned with being at the centre and then ends by being caught up in a web of obsessions and procedures. If something should rightly disturb us and trouble our consciences, it is the fact that so many of our brothers and sisters are living without the strength, light and consolation born of friendship with Jesus Christ, without a community of faith to support them, without meaning and a goal in life. More than by fear of going astray, my hope is that we will be moved by the fear of remaining shut up within structures which give us a false sense of security, within rules which make us harsh judges, within habits which make us feel safe, while at our door people are starving and Jesus does not tire of saying to us: “Give them something to eat” (Mk 6:37).” (49)

Are these the words of a man who is preaching only the "social gospel"?  The purpose of "Urbi et Orbi" is to speak to the world.  Should we just ignore the world's tremendous suffering and instead tell them that they had better repent of their sins or they're going to hell?  Is that how we will reach them?  There is a time and place to preach repentance to people.  But that is not the purpose of "Urbi et Orbi."  To accuse Pope Francis of preaching a false gospel because he shows compassion and empathy for the suffering of the world is truly appalling.

Melanson banned me from his "Catholic" blog because I support the Holy Father.   One of those commenting on Melanson's blog wrote this in response to my comment:

Actually Jesus didn't come to bring comfort to the world. He came to bring peace to individual souls who turn to Him and away from their sins with humility and contriteness of heart in complete surrender. And that can only happen if those individuals openly reject the world.

Oh but hey, don't take my word for it, let Him tell you:

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. For I have come to set a man ‘against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one’s enemies will be those of his household.’" - Matthew 10:34-36

So what do you think you know that Christ doesn't know?

If this was true Catholicism, I would immediately turn in my card. Is following a Christ a matter of just pointing out the sins of others and telling them to shape up or ship out and disregarding their physical suffering since they brought it on themselves anyway? How can anyone possibly say that because you care about the physical suffering of people, then you obviously don't care about their souls? This is exactly what Melanson and "The Radical Catholic" are saying about Pope Francis. They would do well to heed the words of Our Lord as recorded in Matthew 12:36 - "I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak,"

For Paul Anthony Melanson and "The Radical Catholic" and so many others whose main occupation seems to be condemning the Holy Father, here are the words of Pope Francis from Evangelii Gaudium:

“One of the more serious temptations which stifles boldness and zeal is a defeatism which turns us into querulous and disillusioned pessimists, “sourpusses”. Nobody can go off to battle unless he is fully convinced of victory beforehand. If we start without confidence, we have already lost half the battle and we bury our talents. While painfully aware of our own frailties, we have to march on without giving in, keeping in mind what the Lord said to Saint Paul: “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor 12:9). Christian triumph is always a cross, yet a cross which is at the same time a victorious banner borne with aggressive tenderness against the assaults of evil. The evil spirit of defeatism is brother to the temptation to separate, before its time, the wheat from the weeds; it is the fruit of an anxious and self-centred lack of trust.” (85)

UPDATE:  I have invited Paul Anthony Melanson to comment, but he refuses to acknowledge me.  

Credit:  www.pinterest.com

Do I Allow God To Love Me?

The adoration of the shepherds

We are now in the Christmas season in which we celebrate the birth of our Savior.  God is born as a man, like His Creation in every way except sin.  And how did the great Creator choose to come into the world?  He was born in a dirty, vermin-infested manger surrounded by barn animals and greeted by the lowliest members of human society - shepherds, who spent their lives in the fields with their animals apart from everyone else.  These were men with little to no education who rarely even bathed and were shunned by all of "proper" society.  And not only did our Lord choose to announce His coming to these lowliest members of society, He said that He, too, was a shepherd.  Our Lord is the Good Shepherd who will go to any lengths to find His lost sheep and will even lay down His own precious life to save His sheep.

Moses the Shepherd
Credit:  bfmindia.blogspot.com

Anyone who has spent any amount of time studying the Bible and the Life of Christ knows that Our Lord never does anything in a way that we would expect.  As Pope Francis has told us, He is a God of surprises.  In the Old Testament The Lord tests the faith of the father of his people - Abraham - by demanding that Abraham kill his son.  He prepares the patriarch Joseph to save the known civilized world by allowing him to be falsely accused and thrown into prison for several years.  He chooses a slave nation - Israel - to be the ones by which He will make Himself known to the world.  He chooses Moses to lead this slave nation to freedom.  Moses had been driven from society because he had killed a man.  He then become a shepherd (yes, the lowliest member of society) and was prepared by God to lead the nation of Israel by spending 40 years shepherding sheep in the wilderness.  The Lord chose another shepherd - David - to be the great king of Israel.

We can never know the Mind of God. We can never assume that we know what He wants or how He will act among us. Yet, we continue to seek God on our own terms and in our own ways. The result is that we delude ourselves into thinking that we are serving God when in reality we are pushing God away and serving nothing more than our own egos. This was the warning that Pope Francis gave us in his Christmas message. The Holy Father told us that seeking God means that we must be open and allow God to find us. (Read the entire message HERE.)

On this holy night, while we contemplate the Infant Jesus just born and placed in the manger, we are invited to reflect. How do we welcome the tenderness of God? Do I allow myself to be taken up by God, to be embraced by him, or do I prevent him from drawing close? "But I am searching for the Lord" - we could respond. Nevertheless, what is most important is not seeking him, but rather allowing him to find me and caress me with tenderness. The question put to us simply by the Infant's presence is: do I allow God to love me?

Credit:  latino.foxnews.com

This very much echoes a statement made by the Venerable Fulton Sheen:

We always make the fatal mistake of thinking that it is what we do that matters, when really what matters is what we let God do to us.  God sent the angel to Mary, not to ask her to do something, but to let something be done. Since God is a better artisan than you, the more you abandon yourself to him, the happier he can make you.

In the great classic, "The Spiritual Combat" by Lorenzo Scupoli (a monk who lived from 1530 to 1610), the author begins his book by stating, "If you wish, beloved in Christ, to reach the height of perfection, and by drawing near to your God to become one spirit with Him (and no aim can be imagined or expressed which is greater, or nobler than this), you must before all else gain a true idea of what constitutes spiritual perfection." Dom Scupoli then gives examples of what does not constitute spiritual perfection. It does not consist of "outward mortification, in hair shirts and disciplines, in long watchings and fastings, and in other bodily sufferings and chastisements." Dom Scupoli warns against those "who think they have reached the climax of perfection when they say many prayers, attend many services and offices, and are regularly at Church and at Communion."

Dom Scupoli warns us that those who trust in external actions "are all deceived.  For although these practices are sometimes means of gaining the spirit of perfection, and sometimes are its fruits, yet in no sense can it ever be said that true spiritual perfection consists in these."  Dom Scupoli most certainly does not condemn these actions in and of themselves, for as he writes, these practices "are means most efficacious for obtaining spirituality, when they are properly and discreetly employed" and that "they are also fruits of the Spirit in truly spiritual persons" who follow these external practices "not for the sake of curiosity and devotional feeling, but that they may gain deeper knowledge of their own corruptness and of God's Mercy and Goodness."

This great author tells us that

"to others, however, who found perfection entirely on external practices, such works may bring greater ruin than open sins; not that these works are bad in themselves, for in themselves they are very good, but in consequence of the mistaken use which is made of them they have this sad result: because those who practice them are so wrapt up in what they do, that they leave their hearts a prey to their own evil inclinations and to the devices of Satan."

In other words, our trust in external practices causes us to start trusting in ourselves and our own goodness, and that makes us easy prey for the devil.

Dom Scupoli says those who vainly trust in outward practices

"may easily be gathered from their lives and conversation. For in everything, whether it be great or small, they seek their own advantage, and like to be preferred before others; they are self-willed and opinionated, blind to their own faults, sharp-sighted for the faults of others, and severely condemn the sayings and doings of other men. But if you touch only with your finger a certain vain reputation in which they hold themselves and are pleased to be held by others; if you bid them discontinue any of their regular and formal devotions, they are at once angry and exceedingly disturbed."

Dom Scupoli writes:

It is therefore quite evident that all such persons are in great danger. For since the inward eye is darkened, by which they see themselves and their outward actions which are good, they attribute to themselves a high degree of perfection, and so, becoming more and more puffed up, they readily pass judgment upon others; yet they themselves need a special miracle of grace to convert them, for nothing short of that would have effect. It is more easy to convert and bring back an open sinner to the path of truth, than the man whose sin is hidden and mantled with the semblance of virtue.

This, sadly, is what I find almost universally in the Catholic blogosphere, most especially among those who call themselves "traditionalists."  These bloggers hold themselves out as the models of Christian perfection, and forcefully condemn anyone who disagrees with them.  No one is excluded from this condemnation, from lay persons up to and including, and sometimes most especially, the Pope.

Dom Scupoli tells us what constitutes true spirituality:

You clearly and distinctly see, then, from what I have said, that the essence of the spiritual life does not lie in any of those things to which I have alluded. It consists in nothing else but the knowledge of the Divine Goodness and Greatness, of our own nothingness, and proneness to all evil; in the love of God and the hatred of self; in entire subjection not only to God Himself, but for the love of Him, to all creatures; in giving up our own will, and in completely resigning ourselves to the Divine Pleasure; moreover, in willing and doing all this with no other wish or aim than the glory and honor of God, the fulfillment of His Will because it is His Will, and because He deserves to be served and loved.

Pope Francis succinctly summarized this when he said, "Do I allow God to love me?"  Whenever we start trusting in ourselves and in our own actions, we are cutting ourselves off from the love of God. That is the danger of fundamentalism.  And that is the danger of both the liberal and traditional Catholic movements.  While liberal and traditional Catholics may seem like opposites, in reality they are two sides of the same coin because they are both trusting in themselves and their own righteousness.

And between the liberal and ultra-conservative traditionalists, the latter is actually far more spiritually dangerous. It is easy to point out the sin of the liberal because they are so obviously in contradiction to Church teaching. But those who call themselves "traditionalists" are involved in a much more insidious sin. They look very good and spiritual on the outside. But as Dom Scupoli writes, "It is more easy to convert and bring back an open sinner to the path of truth, than the man whose sin is hidden and mantled with the semblance of virtue."

As I have pointed out before, our ultimate role model is Mary, our Blessed Mother. Satan fears her above all other creatures. What is it that made her so dangerous to Satan? It was her complete abandonment of self, and her total and unquestioning reliance on God. "My soul does magnify the Lord, my spirit does rejoice in God my Savior." Mary accepted God's will into her life. She never resisted Him in any way. Therein lies spiritual perfection. How do we get there?

Dom Scupoli tells us this:

Now you see wherein the real perfection of a Christian lies, and that to obtain it you must enter upon a constant and sharp warfare against self.

Our greatest enemy is our own self will, our opinions, our "goodness."  That will cut us off from God faster and more completely than anything or anyone outside of us.  Yes, we are in a spiritual warfare, and the one we must fight more than any other is ourselves.

Dom Scupoli gives us the weapons we must use:

You must provide yourself with four very safe and highly necessary weapons, that you may win the palm, and be finally a conqueror in this spiritual conflict -- these are:

• Distrust in Self
• Trust in God
• Spiritual Exercises
• Prayer

Jesus Christ - the great Creator of the Universe - came to us as a small, defenseless infant.  He became the Sacrifice for our sins by dying as a condemned criminal on the Cross, again helpless and defenseless.  If we are to be like Christ, we too must become "helpless and defenseless."

In his Christmas homily, Pope Francis said the following:

When the angels announced the birth of the Redeemer to the shepherds, they did so with these words: "This will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger" (Lk 2:12).

The "sign" is the humility of God taken to the extreme; it is the love with which, that night, he assumed our frailty, our suffering, our anxieties, our desires and our limitations. The message that everyone was expecting, that everyone was searching for in the depths of their souls, was none other than the tenderness of God: God who looks upon us with eyes full of love, who accepts our poverty, God who is in love with our smallness.

This statement of Pope Francis echoes that of Our Blessed Mother in her great Magnificat:

He has scattered the proud in the conceit of their heart.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and has exalted the lowly.
He has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich He has sent away empty.

Truly, one of the most profound and penetrating questions we can ask ourselves is that posed by our Holy Father, "Do I Allow God To Love Me?"

Credit: iservantmedia.blogspot.com

Are We Judge Or Healer?

There has been a lot of buzz on Catholic websites and blogs during the last couple of weeks over two speakers at two different Catholic high schools. Sister Jane Dominic Laurel, O.P. gave a speech about Catholic teaching on sexuality to a Catholic high school in Charlotte, North Carolina. Sister Jane is an experienced speaker and has never met with controversy in any of her previous talks. However, this time something went wrong, and as the Charlotte Observer reported on April 2:

Nearly 1,000 parents gathered at Charlotte Catholic High School on Wednesday night to air complaints about a recent speech to students by a nun who made what many considered inflammatory comments about gays and lesbians, divorce and single parenthood.

So many parents lined up to speak that the meeting with high school officials, the school’s chaplain and the Diocese of Charlotte’s vicar of education lasted more than an hour longer than scheduled.

The article goes on to state:

Diocese spokesman David Hains acknowledged after the meeting that the Rev. Matthew Kauth, the school’s chaplain, apologized to the parents for a March 21 speech by Sister Jane Dominic Laurel that was not the one he expected her to give.

Hains also said the high school committed to developing new policies that would better scrutinize visiting speakers in the future. He said the school also wants to do a better job of communicating with parents ahead of time when such speeches will deal with sensitive subjects such as sexuality.

“Parents should have been better informed,” Hains said.

Most Catholic bloggers and websites immediately rushed to support Sister Jane against charges made by the parents and students of this high school. Father Z typified many of the responses by Catholic bloggers to this situation. I don't mean to pick on Father Z. I am using his posts because I think they are representative of the thinking of many Catholics. He posted several times on this issue, always in support of Sister Jane. On his first post, entitled, "Sister explains the situation. Spittle-flecked nutty, bullying, intimidation ensue" [HERE], Father Z wrote this:

This is [what] we are going to experience for a long-time, friends. If we Catholics (read: faithful to the teachings of the Church concerning faith and morals) actually dare to speak in public about the Church’s doctrine favorably or attempt to govern our lives by it, the blow-back will be instantaneous, relentless, savage.

There is one big problem with this statement:  neither Father Z nor anyone else who was not at Sister Jane's talk knows exactly what she said.  And we will never know specifically what she said because there was no recording and no transcript of her remarks.  As the title to Father Z's post implies, he feels, even though he does not know exactly what was said, that the problem is entirely with those who were in Sister Jane's audience, and it has nothing to do with her.

In a subsequent post entitled, "Nun Under The Bus", which you can read HERE, Father Z wrote:

I suspect [emphasis mine] that what happened, to build this up into such a thing, is that parents heard vague reports – I say vague because teens are such great sources of accuracy in reporting – about her remarks from their politically-correctly conditioned children and, stung in conscience, got out the pitchforks and torches.

This is a very inflammatory statement on Father Z's part, which he admits is based on assumption, not actual knowledge.   In this same post, Father Z ironically wrote, "Surely there is something of a mob mentality building, and swiftly."  Canonist Dr. Ed Peters was the first to comment, and he made a very wise statement:

My hunches are almost exactly like unto yours, but hunches don’t cut it in the kinds of battles around us now. No one who has not heard (apparently there is no recording) or who has not read (apparently there was no text) Sister’s talk CANNOT weigh in on what she said, for the simple reason that they don’t KNOW what she actually said. Lesson: Keep a record, people.

Unfortunately, neither Father Z nor any of his readers heeded this statement by Dr. Peters, as you will see if you read the comments.  

Sister Mary Sarah, O.P., President of Aquinas College, posted a statement [HERE] on the school website which read in part:

The events around the recent talk by Sister Jane Dominic Laurel, O.P. in Charlotte, NC have produced a great deal of speculation from many sides. Among the commentators, there are few who were actually present to hear the talk, which was not recorded.

. . .

We believe it is our privilege to bring the best aspects of our faith tradition to bear on the moral and cultural questions of the present age. In her presentation, Sister Jane Dominic spoke clearly on matters of faith and morals. Her deviation into realms of sociology and anthropology was beyond the scope of her expertise. Sister is a trained theologian from a Pontifical University and has the credentials to contribute to scholarly bodies of work. This she has done in the past with distinction. The unfortunate events at Charlotte Catholic High School are not representative of the quality of Sister’s academic contributions or the positive influence that she has had on her students. The students at Charlotte Catholic were unprepared, as were their parents, for the topic that Sister was asked to deliver. The consequence was a complete misrepresentation of the school’s intention to bring a message that would enlighten and bring freedom and peace.

Of course, for those who already had their minds made up, this statement by Sister Mary Sarah will make no difference.  Typical of one comment from Father Z's post:

I am just a sinner who reads the CCC and tries his best to live the teachings of our Church. But from my perspective, and the available reporting, I would take Sr. Jane Dominic over Sr. Mary Sarah, hands down. As I recall, we are here to afflict the comfortable, not cater to their delusions.

Why do we feel we need to take sides? The person who posted does not know either Sr. Jane or Sr. Mary Sarah, yet he has already made up his mind that he will "take Sr. Jane Dominic over Sr. Mary Sarah, hands down." Why is he pitting one against another? Why is he making the judgment that Sr. Mary Sarah is somehow the "bad guy" in this situation?

Another very similar situation happened just recently involving Father Rocky Hoffman, executive director of Relevant Radio, who gave a talk to teens at a Rhode Island school on sexuality. You can read about this story HERE. Once again, parents protested against the speech as being divisive. Once again, Catholic bloggers and websites, without knowing exactly what was said, rushed to judgment to support Father Hoffman and condemn those who complained against him.

As in the situation with Sr. Jane, the school involved in Father Hoffman's situation also apologized for the comments made by Father. In an email sent from the school to the parents:

My intention in inviting him here was to have a priest articulate Church teaching in a manner that was pastorally appropriate, doctrinally sound, and deeply respectful of the trust the students showed in bringing these questions forward for answer. My prior knowledge of Fr. Hoffman and his program gave every reason to expect this outcome,” [Principal David] Carradini wrote. “My expectations, and those of the faculty and staff, were not met, and for that I am deeply sorry. Several of the answers provided were not entirely representative of the full breadth of Church teaching on a number of complex and sensitive issues. Several members of the student body, faculty, and staff – including me – were personally offended by his manner of presentation.

This statement, like the one by Sr. Mary Sarah, only brought out more condemnation from many Catholics, who are convinced that all of these people are Catholic in name only and really want to destroy the Church.  Many Catholics look at these fellow Catholics as the enemy.

The world is in very bad shape right now. People have completely lost almost all sense of right and wrong, good and bad. What use to be completely taboo in our culture is now accepted and even embraced. For those of us who are trying to live according to traditional moral values and, most especially, for Catholics, the world has become an alien, antagonistic and hateful environment in which we have no place. Here in the United States, even our government is trying to force us to violate our own beliefs with such actions as the HHS mandate. And it is much worse in other parts of the world where Christians are paying the ultimate price for their beliefs.

The question is, how do we deal with this situation?  Who is our real enemy here?  

As I write this, we are beginning Holy Week in which we commemorate the great Sacrifice of our Creator who poured out His Precious Blood on the cross to save all mankind from sin, and that includes those Catholic parents who are seemingly protesting against Catholic orthodox teaching. When Our Lord was hanging on the Cross and the last drops of His Precious Blood were pouring out of Him after having been brutally beaten on every inch of His Body, He looked down at those who had inflicted this unspeakable punishment, and said, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."

Does this mean we should never point out sin, that we should never let people know when they have strayed from eternal truth?  Absolutely not.  But it does mean that we may have to re-think HOW we present the truth of the Gospel to this post-Christian world.  We can't just say, as far too many have, that if people won't listen, then let them burn in hell.  This completely defeats everything for which Jesus died such an excruciatingly painful and humiliating death. 

We have to realize that many people are victims of our anti-God culture.  In one interview he gave, Pope Francis said the Church is like a field hospital:

“I can clearly see that what the Church needs today is the ability to heal wounds and warm the hearts of faithful, it needs to be by their side. I see the Church as a field hospital after a battle. It’s pointless to ask a seriously injured patient whether his cholesterol or blood sugar levels are high! It’s his wounds that need to be healed. The rest we can talk about later. Now we must think about treating those wounds. And we need to start from the bottom.”

In this regard, Father Kevin Cusick, a chaplain for the Marines, wrote a fascinating article explaining just what a field hospital does.  You can read his article HERE.  Father Cusick explains the function of a field hospital:

Why does a field hospital exist? Where there is a war or a battle there will be the wounded and the dead. In support of the fight the field hospital must function to keep as many as possible in the battle for total victory. Those whose wounds can be treated on the spot and sent back out to join the others in battle continue to be force-multipliers and better enable the military unit to achieve its objective. In more serious cases the wounded will need to be transferred to the rear for more intensive surgery or therapy.

Father Cusick explains how a field hospital functions in aiding those who have been injured.  He then explains how this relates to the statement by Pope Francis:

What is Pope Francis getting at when he compares the Church to a field hospital in a war zone? I believe he wants us to remember that our faithful often have wounds, though we cannot see them, perhaps, and those wounds have tremendous spiritual and other effects on human beings that hamper a full, free and joyful relationship with God as offered in the Church. I believe he wants us to adapt our care to include sensitivity to those wounds that prevent others from partaking fully in the Church’s life and the Lord’s healing from sin and other realities that hurt them and burden them.

I think far too often many of us look at others who are spiritually wounded, whose spiritual legs are broken, and we condemn them because they can't walk like we can. But is this how Our Lord looked on those who were so spiritually lost? Think of Luke 13:34, when Jesus said, "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the [city] that kills the prophets and stones those that are sent unto her, how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen her brood under her wings, and ye would not." 

From Father Cusick:

If we Catholics are to now see ourselves as workers in a field hospital, what kind of mindset do we need? We must be concerned with customer care. We must be ready to meet others where they are before we know what they need, to get where they need to be. We need to be with them enough to “have the smell of the sheep” on us, as Pope Francis says. In this way we will be able to truly care for them, to prescribe not some arbitrary medicine but to focus on their real needs. This way others will begin to experience the love of Christ truly present already in the Church and in the local church of the parish.

If parishes are to be like field hospitals, what kind of things do they need to do differently? We must always operate with the knowledge that grace builds on nature. If families or children are not getting to Sunday Mass, if families are not attending together, there may be human reasons underlying the symptom that need to be treated first. Parenting skills must be dealt with before parents are prepared to see they are leaders in the home, the first teachers of our children in the ways of faith, and then to act on that God-given role. Our witness must be one which compels our recently confirmed young people to pursue their faith and to continue to attend Mass. Our religious education must be effective in handing on the truths of faith to our young people, and so on.

Our proclamation of the Gospel and teaching of the Faith will not have effect without a knowledge of those we are sent to serve. We must take the time to examine and diagnose the spiritual illness before able to effectively offer a cure. This takes time and love.

These are very wise and loving words, from someone who truly cares about others. I think that far too often we are more concerned with being right than helping others. We are so quick to condemn, to point the finger, to write people off as hopeless. We hear bits and pieces of situations, and we think we know all the facts and can accurately judge what is happening.

Like Dr. Peters, I suspect that both Sister Jane and Father Hoffman gave very orthodox talks on Catholic teaching.  I don't believe this is the issue at all.  I believe the issue is whether these talks in the format in which they were presented were helpful to those who heard them.  The answer seems to be an obvious no.  So do we just walk away from these people?  Or do we, instead, try to find another way to reach them, because it would seem that they are obviously among the spiritually wounded.  

We need to ask ourselves what our purpose is as Christians.  Is it just to uphold our own righteousness and look down on those who don't agree with us?  Where would any of us be if Our Lord had done that?  Our Lord has shown great patience and love with us, gently correcting us and leading us in the right way.  Don't we owe that to others for whom He also died?      

Credit:  rustyrev.wordpress.com

Response From A Crack Addicted Catholic Blogger

It seems that my blog has become me answering the charges of "Traditional Catholics" against the Church.  I am really doing this more for myself than for anyone else.  I once completely bought into all of the stereotypical accusations made by Traditional Catholics, such as Vatican II is the root of all evil, the Ordinary Form of the Mass is basically evil, the Church hierarchy are all modernists, etc. And like far too many of those who call themselves Traditionalists, I was convinced that I had all the answers, and all the problems would be solved if they just listened to me.

During the past year, however, I have tried something really radical.  I have started listening to what the Church says through the bishops and the Pope and started reading official Church documents without any other person interpreting the words.  In doing so, I have discovered that it is not at all what I was being told by my "traditionalist heroes."  I have been hearing good solid teaching and defense of the dogmas of the Church from those who are in charge of my soul.  I have come to the amazing discovery that the bishops and the Vatican are not all a bunch of boogeymen out to rob me of my salvation.

By blocking out all of the bombastic rhetoric that I hear from so many "Traditionalists", I have come to the startling conclusion that Jesus Christ is still in charge of His Church and that He doesn't need a sinner like me to be judge and jury of the hierarchy of that Church.  My main concern, as St. Paul wrote, is to work out my own salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12). If I can do that, I will be doing a lot more for the Church than I will by sitting in judgment of everyone else, most especially the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.

One of my former heroes, Michael Voris, has not learned this lesson.  I don't know if he has gotten worse or if I'm just more sensitive, but he did a Vortex episode on January 14 which I feel is actually sinful in its spread of gossip and attempts at fomenting dissension among brethren.  Voris entitles this, "The Gay Priest Party."  You can watch it HERE. 

Voris starts out by mocking and insulting those who see anything positive in the current state of the Catholic Church:

So, wanna continue to think that things are improving in the Church? That the New Springtime is busting out all over? That’s what all those crack-addicted Catholic bloggers over in la la land keep portraying. Don’t listen to them. They are either ignorant to the nth degree, or they are lying to you and they want to keep in friendly with the church of nice.

Yes, Michael, there are problems in the Church, major problems. In the Archdiocese of New York, right next door to me, they are planning on numerous church closings this year. That is serious stuff. But at what point in church history have there not been serious problems? That little thing called the Protestant Reformation decimated the Church in Europe, with millions abandoning Catholicism. When King Henry VIII revolted against the Pope, all but one of the bishops in England followed him. Untold numbers of Catholic Churches, monasteries and abbeys were turned into Anglican property. England, once a totally Catholic country, actually outlawed the Catholic Church until the 19th Century. Somehow, the Church survived and actually has a larger weekly attendance now than the Church of England. And as we know, many Anglicans are now returning to Mother Church.

The Catholic Church is currently experiencing what could be called a spiritual forest fire, with lots of apparent devastation and destruction. But real forest fires end up producing new life and new growth. A forest always comes back stronger than ever after a fire because the fire clears dead trees, new growth is low to the ground and accessible to animals for food, some seeds germinate only after a fire, minerals are returned to the soil, the burned areas are suitable for new species of animals, to name just a few benefits.

Every time the Church has gone through a crisis, she has come back stronger than ever.  Church crises have produced our greatest saints.  Doctrines have been clarified and strengthened as the results of spiritual crises.  Fire cleanses, and this is as true for spiritual fire as it is for physical fire.

When Christ was on this earth, He gave us a wonderful illustration of how to act during the midst of a storm. In Matthew 8, we are told the story of Jesus and the apostles out on the lake when a fierce storm came up. This storm was so severe that the apostles, many of whom were seasoned fisherman who had seen it all, were terrified and woke our Lord crying out, "Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!" (Matthew 8:23-25).

The apostles sounded just like Michael Voris and all like him who claim the Church is going to drown. How did Our Lord respond? "You of little faith, why are you so afraid?" Would Michael Voris respond to this statement of Jesus by calling him a "crack addicted Catholic in la la land." Couldn't Jesus see the severity of the storm? Couldn't he see the water in the boat threatening to take it to the bottom of the lake? Couldn't He see the enormous waves threatening to engulf the little boat? Would Voris tell us not to listen to Jesus because he is "either ignorant to the nth degree", or "lying to you"?

Oh ye of little faith, why are you so afraid?

Voris continues:

This story that I am about to tell you was shared with us by a priest who has first hand knowledge of it.

What?  Why is a priest going to Michael Voris and spreading gossip?  This priest, whoever he is, needs to go to confession IMMEDIATELY.

So what is this story about which this anonymous priest, whoever and wherever he is, could not keep quiet?  Michael Voris gives us no names or places, just hearsay and innuendo, facts that would never stand up in a court of law, as follows:

At Christmas time, a Catholic diocese with a long history of dissent and fomenting heresy by its more high-profile career-minded clergy, had its annual clergy Christmas party.

We have no idea who Voris is talking about and therefore, have no way of confirming the truth of these statements.  We just know that Voris is now besmirching anonymous hierarchy in the Church, leading all Catholics who listen to it to wonder if it is their diocese.   This produces potentially damaging and completely unwarranted dissension among the Catholic faithful.

Just what is this must-be-told story?

The anonymous priest tells Voris that he went to a diocesan Christmas party in which "many" (Voris later says a "couple of dozen") of his fellow priests walked up to our anonymous priest to introduce their boyfriends to him.  This anonymous priest supposedly then goes to his chancery the next day to complain, and according to Voris,

So what did he hear from the chancery priest – did he hear, who was there? We need to gather them together and guide them spiritually or consider their dismissal from the clerical ranks?

Was one ounce of concern expressed for the state of these actively homosexual priests’ souls? HA. Are you kidding? Of course not. This is the Church of Nice remember. No Sin. No Hell. Just keep the machinery of the bureaucracy running.

The priest was told to keep his mouth shut and to not say those kind of things out loud, unless he wanted reprisals.

Just what is the purpose of telling this story to the public? Why put these thoughts into the minds of Catholics when you have absolutely nothing to back it up? Whether this did or did not actually happen, what is the purpose of dragging it out into the public? 

Terry Nelson of Abbey Roads, put it very well. You can read his entire post HERE:

It's unsubstantiated hearsay and rumor. It fuels people's imaginations, it causes suspicion and incites unhealthy curiosity and speculation, leading to rash judgement and gossip. If we do not know who, what, and where, how can a story like this be substantiated? What good is accomplished? What if the priest is a disgruntled, marginalized, unpopular cleric in his diocese and just wants to get revenge? How does he know the other priests are gay? And if they happen to be gay, how does he know they are sexually active or promoting homosexuality? How does he know the men with these priests were their boyfriends? Did they introduce them as such? Were they carrying their rent-a-boy receipt book?

So why is Voris putting this trash out there for all to see? Anyone who has ever listened to Voris knows exactly why: to do what Voris does best, which is to once again come down in harsh criticism and judgment on the hierarchy of the church, and oh boy, does he. He does something that not even the Holy Father has the authority to do. Voris actually pronounces judgment on the souls of these anonymous priests and bishops:

Priests and bishops who downplay Hell AND allow or look the other way in the face of one these evils will be among the FIRST to have judgment pronounced on them.

Chanceries will come down like the fire and brimstone did on Sodom and Gomorrah when dealing with an orthodox heterosexual priest who loves his people and wants to get them to heaven, but they throw parties and feather their own career nests with these sons of Satan in roman collars.

Remember, we are given no facts with which to back up this story.  It is all hearsay and as Terry Nelson of Abbey Roads said, we have no idea who this priest is or what his story is.

Voris' tone becomes even more condemnatory:

Does anyone within earshot of this REALLY and TRULY want to stand up and say that the active homosexual priests strutting around with their boyfriends at a Christmas party [as Terry said, we have no proof of this] are not in extreme danger of eternal damnation?

And moreover, does anyone really and truly want to stand up and proffer the insane conclusion that the leadership that knows about this activity, condones it and covers-up for it for political career-advancement motives aren’t standing on the very edge of Hell itself and if they were to die tonight, would be consigned to those flames for all eternity.

What a terribly strange notion of God you all have in the Church of Nice. You have lost, if you ever possessed it, any supernatural faith and you are an eminent danger to the souls in your charge. Leave the priesthood. Leave the Church.

If you can’t recognize your evil, if you can’t smell the noxious odor of hell even now encircling you and come to your senses and repent, then get out now before you corrupt any more souls.

Voris actually judges the minds and hearts of these anonymous priests and bishops and then has the temerity to say to them, "Leave the priesthood. Leave the church." Our Lord did not say this to Judas, the one who betrayed Him! He constantly reached out to Judas, imploring him with love and mercy to repent. And Our Lord knew exactly the state of Judas' soul. Voris is pronouncing judgment on people that he does not even know, and doing so through second-hand information, He then exhorts his listeners to follow his scandalous example.

Earlier in this post, I urged the anonymous priest in this story to go to confession immediately.  I also urge Michael Voris to do the same.  This Vortex episode is one big sin.  He is spreading stories about unnamed people and about which he has no firsthand information.  These are stories designed to destroy the reputations of people. Worse, these are stories which produce public scandal, as Terry Nelson wrote, "It fuels people's imaginations, it causes suspicion and incites unhealthy curiosity and speculation, leading to rash judgement and gossip."  

Unlike his treatment of priests and bishops, I do not judge the soul of Michael Voris.  He may truly believe that he is serving the will of God by condemning the hierarchy of the Church.  But he is sadly misguided.  Proverbs 6:19 makes it very plain that this is most definitely not the will of God, as we are told that of the seven things the Lord hates, among them is "he that soweth discord among brethren."  

I have shown time and again how Michael Voris twists facts and statements to put the hierarchy of the Church in the worst possible light. His mission seems to be to destroy them in any method he can. I urge you, please do not follow Voris or anyone like him.  We live in very dangerous times and Satan is using any way he can to ensnare the faithful.  We are warned that he can appear as an angel of light, but you know something is seriously wrong when the main message is to criticize and condemn Church hierarchy.

Michael Voris is convinced and is trying to convince all the rest of us that the mainstream Catholic Church is teetering on the edge of total collapse. It is his position that, unless we all are in complete agreement with everything he says and stands for, we are on the road to perdition.  But this is not the message of Jesus Christ.  

Remember the apostles in the boat.  Remember what Our Lord said, "Oh ye of little faith.  Why are you afraid?"

Credit:  www.prophetofgrace.org