|
L e t t e r s
Too Much of a Bad Thing
|
|
|
|
FIRST off, let me take the time to thank you and your organization for making me a recent convert to the true faith. I have pondered my spirituality for a long time, and have spent many a night searching for the truth. There was even a time I was going to become a J.W. Luckily for me, I got a hold of several books (What Catholics Believe, Catholicism and Fundamentalism) and tracts. I truly hold you all in high spiritual regard. I am also fond of This Rock. That is why my writing of this letter pains me.
I found the article titled "Sister Hell" by Terrye Newkirk (May 1996) to be disturbing. While I enjoy getting caught up to date on the so-called "liberal" front that plagues the Church, I do not think that this article was called for. What may have been condensed to one or two paragraphs in "Dragnet" was blown into a cover story, which, in my (albeit feeble and fallible) opinion, was written in a vindictive manner.
I got the opinion Terrye wanted to take out her frustration on the members of the Sister-L list that she got booted from. While Terrye has every right to have anger against the list, I do not see the need to make her frustration into a cover story of an apologetics magazine. Are there not more pressing situations facing our Church today (i.e., Call to Action-a cover story on this schismatic group is needed) than a little heretical mailinglist group on the Internet?
Does it not say in Scripture, "Bless those that curse you" (Matt. 6:44) and "Whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also" (Matt. 6:39)? Terrye should have made short mention of the list and then been done with it. It was my impression that she was attacking this group in unhumble way.
I will, as Terrye asks us to, pray for the members of the Sisters list as well as all of the other schismatic groups (SSPX, CTA, etc.).
Once again, I wish to express my praise of your organization. Just try to keep the personal attacks to the person, not to the magazine.
Daniel Janecek
Grafton, Wisconsin
Terrye Newkirk replies: Of Sister-L's 900 subscribers, many are highly placed in Call to Action, Women's Ordination Conference, and other groups attempting to undermine Catholic teaching.
The point of writing the article was not to express anger-by the time I wrote the article, I felt nothing but concern for such confused Catholics. Yet we believe our readers deserve to see firsthand how "progressive" Catholics operate, how they distort and conceal the truth to further their destructive ends. Turning the other cheek is never an excuse for cooperating with evil. We need to be clear-eyed about the situation within the Church, even if that involves naming names.
Repentance First
IN her article "The Long Winding Road" (This Rock, September 1996) Terrye Newkirk ends with the question, Why me Lord? Maybe she has also given us the answer: I have sinned and come back. I have often wondered why Jesus made so little apparent effort to reach out to the Pharisees.
Then I found Luke 7:29-30: "All the people who heard him. . . acknowledged God's plan by accepting baptism from John; but by refusing baptism from him the Pharisees and the lawyers had thwarted what God had in mind for them." The baptism of John was a baptism of repentance, but the Pharisees (Luke 18:9-14) admitted to no sin, so could not repent, could not accept baptism from John, could not hear Jesus. Without repentance one cannot hear God.
Terrye's article radiates repentance. "Acknowledgment of sin and repentance brings us forgiveness which produces love of God" (Luke 7:36-47). As Paul tells us (1 Cor. 13), knowledge and deeds are useless unless they are founded on love of God. If we would teach and do, we must daily acknowledge sin and repent. It might be well if more seminars and workshops began in the confessional. Thank you, Terrye, for bringing us back to basics.
Joseph Gilley
Fountain Valley, California
Nashville Conversion
I JUST wanted to thank you for Terrye Newkirk's "The Long and Winding Road." So many things in the latter part of the story mirror my journey into the Catholic Church, and its wonderful to read something like this.
Terrye and I have in common the Cathedral of the Incarnation in Nashville, Tennessee. As a grad student down the street at Vanderbilt, I decided to go with a Catholic friend to Mass at the Cathedral, purely out of curiosity. It was at this first Mass that I felt that very same Presence felt by Terrye, the overpowering majesty and love of God, and a deep sense of worship I had never experienced before as a dedicated Southern Baptist. In the Cathedral I felt the overwhelming call of God for me to enter the Church.
It is interesting that the day Terrye visited the Cathedral, the roads were thick with ice. I was trapped in a hotel room in Memphis during the ice storm in January of1994, trapped with the gentle but strong calling of God, a Bible, and the book Catholicism and Fundamentalism. When they finally opened the interstate back to Nashville, I was so close to being ready to take my step of faith. But I still had one issue I had not worked out, the issue of the Blessed Virgin.
I had read and agreed with Karl Keating's book that to be truly Catholic, one could not be a "cafeteria Catholic," picking and choosing which beliefs to accept, so I was heartbroken that I was not ready to go.
On the treacherous trip back to Nashville, driving at night, weaving around the thousands of trees which the ice storm had left across the interstate, I arrived at the point where I gave up and told God that if he really wanted me to be Catholic, I needed help, I needed some kind of sign like the one Terrye asked for. Finally, I did something very strange: I prayed to Mary for the first time. "I don't know for sure if you can hear me, but if you can, please pray for me that our Father will give me the wisdom to know the truth about you."
After my prayer, I felt as if a great burden had been lifted from me. I had truly turned it over to God. I didn't expect any angels to come; instead I expected that God would subtly answer my prayers over the course of the next few weeks. My mind was at ease, and I could concentrate on driving.
I popped a cassette tape into the radio, and a familiar song started playing, a song which I had always considered secular. To my surprise and joy, God spoke to me through the words of that song, and by the end of it, I was in tears and felt like the Blessed Mother was sitting in that car with me. I had received the sign I had asked for much more quickly and clearly than I had ever expected.
I attended Mass at the Cathedral for several months, almost crying each time I sat in the back while others went forward to receive Jesus. I moved to Indiana a little while later and joined the Church there.
In 1995, I returned to Nashville for the summer, and, unable to find a job, I attended the noon Masses at the Cathedral, just as Terrye described them.
It was there that God called me yet another time. Though I tried to run from him and pretend I didn't hear his call, I have once again surrendered to his will, and am now planning on entering seminary next August.
So as you can see, the Cathedral of the Incarnation holds a special place in my heart as well. It is truly a place where the Real Presence of God can be felt, even when many of the communicants look bored on their lunch hour. Sometimes I wonder if God doesn't want me to return to Nashville to serve him there. It's so neat to hear the story of someone I've never met who has experienced the call of God in the same place as myself.
Kevin Joiner
Anderson, Indiana
Calvin and Hobbes?
IN "Ankerberg Aweigh" (July/August 1996), one of Steve Ray's footnotes says Luther and Calvin believed in baptismal regeneration. Calvin? I don't think so. Calvin saw infant baptism as a sign and seal of God's promise to believing parents to bless their families through the generations, parallel to circumcision as the sign of being included in the Old Covenant. Believing in infant baptism is not the same as believing in baptismal regeneration. Actually, pointing out the difference between Luther and Calvin on this point would strengthen the argument of the article even more.
As for Robert Sungenis's challenge to Protestants to debate ("Where Have All the Opponents Gone?", June 1996), I'm sure you've heard by now that Dr. John Gerstner has died, so I hope the challenge will be answered by someone else, whether listed or not.
Lynn Nordhagen
Chattaroy, Washington
Wicked Fun
I JUST finished reading the July/August 1996 edition of This Rock. Just great! Martin Fontenot's "Anastasia in Ecclesialand" was wicked, but fun. From the Fundamentalists ("tea alone . . . could you please pass the sugar") to the poor Traditionalists (staining books written in 1924), Mr. Fontenot's jabs remind us all where the true Church lies.
Tony Kovach's "An Interactive Detective Story" was filled with fresh insights (fresh to me anyway). Only This Rock gives the kind of ammunition I need to give an account of the faith when opportunity arises.
Randy England
Mexico, Missouri
Czech It Out!
WHILE on the World Wide Web, I came across your excellent summary of Catholic belief [Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth]. I am an Evangelical Christian, but realize that there is much I can learn from both the Orthodox and the Catholic Churches. I also do not appreciate the way that many Evangelicals interact with Catholics and Catholicism.
Each year, I teach a seminar in the Czech Republic on the beliefs of Orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Islam. My purpose is to help young Evangelicals to interact in a healthier manner with those of other faiths. As an Evangelical, I of course place great emphasis on the importance of individual faith in Jesus Christ and therefore support "evangelism." But by "evangelism," I mean making the good news of Jesus Christ known, rather than deliberately proselytizing from one Church to another.
I would like the students to wrestle with what Catholics, Orthodox, and also Muslims really believe, so that we can consider what the real differences are, rather than functioning on inaccurate perceptions which are often more the result of reaction than of considering truth.
Most of the materials I have found on Catholicism are too technical for people with English as a second language to dig through. I'd love to have the group simply study the recently published Catechism, but we certainly wouldn't get far taking that approach.
The booklet Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth is simple, clear, and accurate, and so I'd like to ask your permission to make copies of the article for those in the seminar (about thirty) so that they can study what the Church really believes and teaches, rather than continuing to function on assumptions regarding Catholic teaching.
Greg Reader
via the Internet
Recovering Catholics
IT'S incredible! Last week I stumbled into an Internet newsgroup called alt.recovery.catholic. After posting a plug for the Catholic Answers Web site, I started reading some posts. Right off the bat, I read jokes that insinuated that a majority of Catholic bishops need baby-sitters and was told that priests shouldn't be trusted in confessionals with children.
I responded not only to these posts, but others as well. In retrospect I see I erred by using phrases such as "attacks against the Catholic Church invariably come from people who don't know what they're talking about" and the like.
The incredible part is that as soon as I realized that I was being a lousy apologist, the September issue of This Rock came to my mailbox with its "Up Front" article about apologetic errors. I thought, "Boy, was this ever timely."
The tone, the tone. You got it, Mr. Keating.
But I hope no harm was done. The people I encountered have, in my view, blamed the Church for a myriad of problems, and a short encounter with me could never have dissuaded them from hating the RCC. Maybe next time.
Your article has comforted and encouraged me. I did make some good posts, and maybe the bad ones can be learned from.
Another point you made is well taken. Apologetics requires homework. I haven't done a fraction of the homework a good apologist should do, and to engage in high-level apologetics would be a mistake for me right now (but don't worry, I won't). I am equipped to respond to some ill advised attacks, though, and will if I feel I can do it tactfully in the future.
I assumed (bad idea) that the members of the alt. recovery. catholic newsgroup were Chick Publications-type Fundamentalists and kind of had an attitude. You live, you learn.
Thomas Young
West Babylon, New York
Elephant or Donkey?
ALTHOUGH I'm not supporting any comment of Francis X. Wrenn ("Letters," July/ August 1996), I do feel a bit upset with your reply stating the present Congress has done nothing to halt abortion or euthanasia and stating many Republicans are pro-abortion. This is a misleading statement.
Congress passed a law to ban partial birth abortion; President Clinton vetoed it. The Senate failed to override the veto due to Democrats, not Republicans! Democrats had control of Congress for 40-plus years and did nothing but continue to allow an increased use of abortion.
Republicans have only been in two years and are expected to have changed everything already. There may be some Republicans who are pro-choice, but they are the minority. The majority of Democrats are pro-choice, and many of those pro-choice Democrats are Catholics! Also don't forget, the Democrats' platform favors the "right" to abortion.
Please don't give the image that this Congress has not done anything. Its stand on abortion (as well as numerous other issues) is much better than that of the Democrats. Although I have expressed this strong opinion, I must also say I do love your magazine. It has been very helpful on my defending my faith.
Linda DeOrian
Copperas Cove, Texas
Editor's reply:
No need to apologize for a strong opinion. I'm partial to strong opinions, having two or three myself.
I stand by what I wrote. While it is true Republicans, as a whole, have been more pro-life than Democrats, Republicans have fallen far short. It's hard to think of a leader of the party who is strongly pro-life -nominally, yes, but strongly?
While the attempted ban on partial birth abortions was a good thing, it also was trivial, since it could stop at best a few hundred abortions out of an annual total of well over a million.
What I would expect from legislators who are strongly pro-life is unremitting efforts to clog the system, starting with a bill that would remove abortion from federal court jurisdiction. (The Constitution gives Congress this power-why hasn't it been used?)
From a strongly pro-life president I would expect to see executive orders halting funding of Planned Parenthood, forbidding abortions in all federal medical facilities, military and civilian, and declaring the unborn to be human. And a president should take Teddy Roosevelt's advice and make the presidency "a bully pulpit."
If Roe v. Wade was an exercise in "raw judicial power," then it will take some stiff-spined work by Congress or a president to overcome it. Might this result in a "constitutional crisis"? I hope so, because we apparently need such a crisis to set things right. After nearly 24 years, it's a sure bet that neither party will do much if present methods are followed.
A Mere 1,000 Years Off
YOUR answer to the question of when the term "Roman Catholic Church" first came into being (June 1996) is off by over 1,000 years!
This term, though it may have fallen out of use because the authority of Rome was uncontested for a while, was originally used to identify that the teachings of the Church of Rome were in fact the very teachings of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church founded by Christ. Here are examples that I have used:
1.In the early part of the sixth century the orthodox African bishops were banished to Sardinia by the Vandal Hunneric, who supported the Arians. In a statement of their faith to the "Various Brethren" they equated "Roman" with "Catholic" when they declared that they follow "what the Roman, that is, the Catholic Church, follows and preserves."
2.We find this phrase used in the "Decretal" of Gelasius (495), bishop of Rome (492-496), when he declared that non-canonical writings were rejected by the "whole Roman Catholic and apostolic Church."
3.Answering heretics, a synod at Milan referred to Rome as the standard of orthodoxy: "But if they will not believe the teaching of the bishops. . . let them believe the Apostles' Creed, which the Roman Catholic Church keeps and preserves incorrupt."
Though "Roman Catholic" was not used as a popular (albeit if negative) title, it is clear that it "came into being" long before you say it did.
Adam S. Miller
Gaithersburg, Maryland
Easy Credit?
I VERY much enjoyed "The New and Improved Chesterton" (June 1996) -even though it was my second reading. It originally appeared in the Midwest Chesterton News (January 1994) as "Chesterton: A Spirit of Vatican II Bibliography."
It would seem at least a credit would be due MCN?
Ron Waldron
Sonoma, California
Terrye Newkirk replies: Unless a contract specifies otherwise, the writer retains rights to his own material. Mark P. Shea offered us "Chesterton" as a reprint, and we credited him. we're pleased to let readers know, though, that the real Chesterton still claims adherents, as the existence of MCN attests
A Methodical Look
I LOVE the magazine and what it teaches! I am a United Methodist pastor who is seriously looking at the Catholic Church, and This Rock provides me with many of the answers that I have been looking for.
I recently joined the Coming Home Network, headed by Marcus Grodi. I am praying that God will guide me to the place that he wants me. If that means to ministry within the Roman Catholic Church, so be it.
Jeff Foster
Clarksville, Tennessee
As Easy as 1, 2, 3
HOW to spot the true Church-a supplement to Tony Kovach's "Interactive Detective Story" (July/ August 1996):
1. Look for the church that is always persecuted.
2. Look for the church that survives all persecutions from without.
3. Look for the church that survives all treasons from within.
Rev. Denis O'Brien, M.M
Dallas, Texas
Aim to the left, please
YOU should save most of your fire for the "progressives," whom I regard as nothing more than apostates. They continue to wear the sheepskin of Catholicism to hide the Modernist wolf beneath.
Theodore Van Oosbree
La Mesa, California
Editor's reply:
Your wish is fulfilled. Take a look at Jack Taylor's essay, "The Modernist Persona," on page 25.
|
C A T H O L I C A N S W E R S :
[TOP]
of
