|
L e t t e r s
Stars light, stars bright
|
This Rock
Volume 6, Number 9
 September 1995 
|
|
|
AFTER five years of applauding This Rock I find occasion for strong disagreement. I refer to the subject of astrology. Unfortunately, much of the anti-astrology fare currently published in Christian circles (such as in "The Father Knows Best" last February) is more superstitious than astrology ever was. Detractors who purport to dismiss the claims of astrology, as well as those detractors cited, are typically experts in everything but astrology (a scenario that Catholic apologists can well identify with).
For example, Catholic television programs that purport to debunk astrology may only set out to interview an astronomer, which is analogous to interviewing Dave Hunt or Loraine Boettner to get to the heart of Catholic teaching: the better to support what initially stems from academic bias or prejudice. Not having studied its intricacies, modern man, for the most part, knows little of what Francis Bacon, "the apostle of scientific method," called "sane astrology"--as opposed to what he called "superstitious astrology." St. Albert the Great wrote well on astrology and its applications, which was also under the title "astronomia." Albert and his friend, St. Thomas Aquinas, are rare sources for us since they understood both the basic principles of astrology and are now Doctors of the Church, nor were they so stupid as to accept astrology merely because others did. Each recognized astrology through personal observation of its applications over time. Detractors may attempt to explain this away, disclaim it or exclude it from their publications, but those who have truly studied this complex subject over long periods of time know better. Aquinas wrote in candid observation:
"We must say that men generally follow their passions which are motions of their sense desires and stand under the influence of the heavenly bodies; few indeed are the number of wise men who resist these passions. Therefore, astrologers can, for the most part, make true predictions, especially for mankind in general. This is less clear in specific predictions because nothing prevents a particular man from resisting his passions through the exercise of free will. This is why astrologers themselves assert that the wise man dominates the stars, insofar as he controls his passions" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Prima Pars [Turin, Rome: Marietti Publishers, 1950], p. 541).
While it is true that this particular passage is probably lost upon the minds of the preponderant majority of intellectuals today without the merest notion of basic astrology (and is therefore open to misinterpretation or manipulation), astrology still asserts nothing more, nor nothing less, than the above--e.g., astrology is not fated, does not impede free will, nor is it invalid (which is not to include watered down, popularized versions, which are not "sane astrology.")
Currently, the Church is unable to appreciate the beauty (God's own) of astrological systems because science today--which the Church does not ignore--precludes it." "Science" has turned a blind eye and a stiff arm to outside investigations of serious astrology with any positive outcomes, of which there are several. In this regard, astrological research journals report lack of cooperation, intellectual dishonesty, and even cover up. There are a few exceptions to this, such as the professor emeritus of psychology at London University who is open-minded to well-conceived astrological research, experiments, and investigations of astrological claims. Some he has recognized.
J. Lale
San Antonio, Texas
Instant apologist
I'VE been a fan of yours for a couple of years. I'm an associate professor of forest ecology in the forest sciences department at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Through a process I still don't fully understand, I have also become a Catholic apologist. I have a deep love for Holy Mother Church and complete loyalty to the magisterium.
I current teach in the adult religious education program, the RCIA program, and most recently confirmation class at Sacred Heart Cathedral in Fairbanks. Recently the rector of the cathedral moved 25 miles down the road to the town of North Pole, and now I have an invitation to talk there. This thing has really grown!
Generally I get a very good response from the faithful, but of course we have some priests offering a watered-down religion and dissent. Most recently I have begun to get criticism for presenting in rather gentle form the orthodox Catholic faith, but as long as I have the forum, I'll explain and defend the real thing. The bishop has even attended a couple of my talks, and it has been reported that he was "impressed," although I'm not sure how to take that.
I just want you to know you have fans in places you may not even know about and that you have inspired others to jump in and try the same thing.
Glenn Juday
Fairbanks, Alaska
Another web-ster writes
I JUST want to write a short note to tell you that I have been watching your Web pages over the last couple of months. You are doing a really excellent job as you continue to add more to them. We do a lot of development of Web pages where I work, so I can appreciate the work and vision that goes into them. I must say your home page is one of the most visually pleasing I have seen. I wondered if you chose a background of bricks on purpose to go with the "rock" theme.
Ray Klucz
via the Internet
Editor's reply:
No, the connection with "rock" didn't occur to us. We chose bricks because we long have wanted to paint the name of our group on a wall in sight of everyone, and this is a non-destructive way to do it: virtual graffiti on a virtual brick wall.
Unsolicited suggestions
I have eagerly read your magazine since first being introduced to it by my RCIA sponsor in 1991 when I joined the Church.
Raised in a Protestant church (but not an active member), I had many incorrect notions about what Catholics did and believed. Hearing the Protestant version of the Reformation is a bit like being on a jury and hearing only the plaintiff's case. It is very convincing at first, but, before we rebuke the defendant, maybe we should hear his side. He has a story to tell too--and some interesting expert testimony which makes the plaintiff look less than forthright.
I have just finished listening to the "Bible Only Debate" [tapes available through this issue's order form] and reading Where We Got the Bible [by Henry G. Graham, whose conversion story concludes in this issue]. I am writing to share a couple of ideas.
First, I have not found you using what seems like an excellent proof text for apostolic teaching authority, as opposed to private revelation: Acts 8:30-31. When Philip asked the traveling Ethiopian, "Do you understand what you are reading?", did the Ethiopian reply, "No problem--I have my own Bible and I believe in sola scriptura"? No, he replied, "How can I unless someone explains it to me?" And the apostle taught him.
A second idea is for a new regular feature in This Rock: a practical apologetics forum, maybe a page or two in length, in which a responsible Protestant will state a common objection to the Catholic Church, in his own words, and then Catholic Answers will provide a good response. The idea is to get the Protestants to take their best shots, requiring us to become more proficient and learned.
Third, I would like to suggest a topic for a length presentation, possibly even an independent publication: the seven Old Testament books that the Protestants removed from their Bible. This is a potent topic for apologetics because it strikes at the heart of Protestantism. I would like to see a detailed, historical account of why and when the books were removed.
My experience has been that Protestants know nothing at all about these books or else simply dismiss them as a Catholic tradition. But we must ask them, when Paul wrote in 2Timothy 3:16 that all Scripture is profitable, was he not talking about the Old Testament canon as it then existed? How do we establish that the so-called apocrypha were not "hidden" at all from the early Church, but, on the contrary, were a recognized part of Scripture during apostolic times?
Ed Simpson
Dallas, Texas
Editor's reply:
Your idea for a new column is a good one, but it might be of more utility if it were not limited to Protestant objections to the faith. After all, there are a lot of secularist anti-Catholics out there too, plus opponents in other religions. In any case, your suggestion is one we'll weigh as we consider how to improve This Rock. We invite all of our readers to propose new departments, the more specificity the better.
As for your suggestion about an article on the deuterocanonical books, we are working on that idea and hope to publish a piece during 1996.
If sola scriptura is true…
WHAT would it take for sola scriptura to be a doctrine of God and not of man? Perhaps it would go this way.
It would have to be written by John the Evangelist, the last apostle to die. It would have to declare that no on e else will ever again write an inspired book. It would have to declare that all oral tradition is of man and not God. It would have to declare that when Peter died, so did any organized church. It would have to declare and name every book in the New and Old Testaments. Above all else, it would have to declare that Scripture is self-interpreting and then the impossible--everyone coming to the same conclusions when reading the Bible.
George E. Scanlon
West Roxbury, Massachusetts
Editor's reply:
Perhaps not all of your proposed declarations would be needed. It doesn't seem to follow that sola scriptura implies the Church died with Peter. Today's advocates of sola scriptura don't claim that, and it does not seem logically necessary even on the assumption that the Bible somehow teaches sola scriptura.
Bringing up Andrew
I AM a Roman Catholic married to an Evangelical Protestant. Recently we have been blessed with our first child, a son named Andrew. It is my intention to instruct my son in the fullness of the faith as taught by the Roman Catholic Church. There are formidable obstacles to overcome due to my wife's adverse attitude toward Catholicism. I'd ask the readers of This Rock so inclined to please pray for this situation.
Name withheld by request
Editor's reply:
This is a plea that will receive many positive responses from our readers, I'm sure, and it's one we've heard from many people, either in correspondence or in person.
There are two solutions that can be envisioned: This man's wife remains a non-Catholic, but drops her antagonism toward the faith, or she joins in her husband's enthusiasm for it by becoming a Catholic herself. Let's pray that either may occur, but let's pray harder for the latter.
Latter-day success
I HAVE been meaning to write because I have a success story to tell you. The young lady we were concerned about embracing the Mormon religion has returned to the Catholic Church, is receiving the sacraments, and is preparing for confirmation!
Her mother credits the materials from Catholic Answers for helping convince the girl that she was making a mistake in leaving the Catholic Church.
I received one of the video tapes of Patrick Madrid's debating Mormonism, watched it, and passed it on to the family I have been discussing. I asked them to return the tape because I think it is excellent and I wish to put it in the library a friend and I hope to open for our parish.
Marilyn Prouty
Lockeford, California
A priestly campus priest
I WAS ordained in 1991 and in 1993 became the Catholic Campus Minister at Auburn University. It has been much of what I expected. There are some students who are interested in their faith, ask questions often, and it has taken deep root in them.
They are a great pleasure but are the minority, of course. There are some others who hang around the student center and use it as a social club. Many of these are secularized and are only minimally open to the gospel and are more open to drinking and sex.
Each year I have taught a catechism class with moderate attendance (twenty-plus students). I had much to clean up when I got here. The first thing I did was cancel our subscription to a heterodox paper, order some good periodicals, and clean off the book shelf. I had to change the Mass some. When questioned, I explained why I did each thing, and the students seemed to understand somewhat. Some revolted during the first year, some left, a few were extremely happy (they had been suppressed under the previous regime), and most just followed the flow.
The national Catholic Campus Ministry Association is pitiful and should be dissolved. I received a couple of their mailings, and one featured a militant radical feminist bashing the Church. I canceled our membership. Fr. C. John McCloskey III (Princeton's Campus Minister) wrote me and told me that we should start our own association, but neither of us has time for such an undertaking.
I wish more students were open to and enthusiastic about their faith. I see firsthand the damage done in our Catholic school system. Last year most students did not know that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Chr ist (no surprise there). Many more know it now, but there is much else they do not know.
The students who have taken an interest in their faith are soaking it up like a sponge. That makes everything worthwhile. They ask me questions for hours. A few have come back to their faith, and a few have come into the Church from other denominations.
I have had the opportunity to speak to a few organizations on and around campus. In a panel on the afterlife, I got to explain purgatory; to an ethics class, the sanctity of life; to a Western religion class, the Catholic position on justification; to a service organization, the danger and sin of materialism.
Our students are challenged about their faith, and I'm glad that I have information to give them, thanks to organizations like yours.
Rev. James N. Dean
Auburn, Alabama
|
