|
L e t t e r s
LOOK, LINE’S A STINKER!
|
|
|
|
The September 1996 issue was first-rate, especially the interview with Scott Hahn, one of our favorite teachers and theologians. It was right on. Imagine our surprise when we were finishing up the nice job that Mark P. Shea did concerning reading Scripture to read in almost his last paragraph, "Those . . . who love Scripture and embrace the supernatural, but repudiate the human community that created Scripture under inspiration . . ." (emphasis added).
It appears that Mr. Shea has swallowed some of the historical-critical line that the Gospels were written much later than the first century, and by a "community" instead of an evangelist. Mr. Shea, please be aware that there is no objective proof that your assumption is true, only the speculative opinions of the current crop of Scripture scholars. We suggest a rereading of the Scott Hahn interview.
Vatican II clearly states, "The Church has always and everywhere held and continues to hold that the four Gospels are of apostolic origin. For what the apostles preached in fulfillment of the commission of Christ, afterwards they themselves and apostolic men, under the inspiration of the divine Spirit, handed on to us in writing: the foundation of faith, namely, the fourfold Gospel, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John" (Dei Verbum n. 18).
Richard & Frances Ganzer
Middleburg Heights, Ohio
Mark P. Shea’s reply:
I appreciate and share the concern of the Ganzers to preserve the Church’s teaching concerning the apostolic origin of the New Testament and particularly the Gospels. I am afraid, however, they have read vastly more into my remark than my words can possibly justify. I, in fact, do believe the New Testament documents were written in the first century and that the Gospels come, if not always from the hand of the traditional authors themselves, then from amanuenses who were very close to the preaching of the apostle (as in the case, for instance, of John, which is clearly recording firsthand testimony, yet not, apparently, by the hand of the apostle himself (John 19:35, 21:24). To say this in no way impugns the fact that the apostles "under the inspiration of the divine Spirit, handed on to us in writing . . . the fourfold Gospel." Likewise, by speaking of the human community which wrote, edited, sifted, collated, and canonized the Scriptures (both Old and New Testament) over the period of about a millennia and a half, I in no way intended to impugn the apostolic origin of the New Testament. I believe the teaching of the Vatican Council, which the Ganzers cited in their letter. I merely meant to place these Scriptures in the context of the Church’s Tradition and magisterial authority. I apologize if there was any confusion.
STUCK ON GRODI
As all fellow readers of This Rock will attest (I am sure), the first issue of 1997 is absolutely splendid. I particularly enjoyed Karl Keating’s interview with Marcus Grodi. Having seen the latter recently at a Steubenville summer conference and then reading about his story in Surprised by Truth, I was very interested in getting a glimpse into his life’s work today.
It was a nice touch to supply the address of his organization for further contact. Frequent articles on various apologetic and evangelistic organizations, which include just such points of contact, can be an extremely valuable resource to many Catholics and would-be Catholics alike who happen across the pages of your magazine. May God continue to raise up dedicated men and women for his service.
Rory Reichenberg
Bronx, New York
PIRATES OF PENANCE?
We wish to take issue with Fr. John Williams saying that This Rock magazine should "not serve as a forum for liturgical nightmares" ("Letters," January 1997). Reporting liturgical abuses to the local ordinary, as Fr. Williams suggests, is for the most part a waste of time. Some of us speak from experience, where the local bishop either ignores our correspondence, or, if we’re lucky enough to receive a response, we are told that the "liturgical experts" have countless degrees in liturgy. So much for correcting inclusive language and other nonsense so common nowadays.
Unfortunately, things are not getting any better. In many parishes they have gone from the holy to the odd, from the sublime to the stupid, from reverence to rebellion. Those of us who are fortunate enough to live close to a Byzantine Catholic church have found reverence, beauty, and orthodoxy in these precious Catholic churches, thank God! Our St. Anne Byzantine Catholic Church in San Luis Obispo consists of 94 percent Catholics of the Latin Rite who could no longer tolerate many of the abuses in our local parishes. The liturgical pirates have just about destroyed the Novus Ordo Mass, and they are not finished yet.
Constantino and Maryann Santos
Atascadero, California
THEY GO TOGETHER LIKE . . .
I would like to respond to the letter of Robert Maier ("Letters," January 1997) regarding the emphasis of Catholics on the suffering Christ and Protestants’ emphasis on the resurrected Christ.
Let us remember that our true redemption was brought forth by Christ through the Paschal Mystery, i.e., his Passion, death, and Resurrection. His Passion and death would make no sense without his Resurrection. Likewise, his Resurrection without his Passion and death is senseless. They go together just like a husband and a wife in marriage. You cannot and should not separate them.
Catholics’ emphasis on the suffering and death are both theological and biblical. Sufferings, in Catholic theology, have redemptive value. In the New Testament, Christ exhorts us to "carry our crosses and follow him." His Crucifixion may have ended at Calvary but his Body’s (our) crucifixion has not. "In my own flesh I fill up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ for the sake of his Body, the Church" (Col. 1:24). How many times are we crucified for our Christian beliefs these days?
Our biblical basis for the crucifix is 1 Corinthians 1:22–25: "Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom but we preach Christ crucified—a stumbling block to Jews and an absurdity to Gentiles, but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks alike, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For God’s folly is wiser than men, and his weakness more powerful than men."
Charlie M. Gopez, Jr.
North Hollywood, California
DIAGNOSIS: TRUTH
Our parish priest, "Father Bob," has been a blessing for us. Last fall he expressed to me his interest in a Bible session mixed with apologetics. The parents of First Communion, penance, and confirmation candidates are required to attend. The results of the last few sessions have been positive. The door is being cracked open into a new world which many of these parents never knew existed.
As for me, I have been a diagnostic tech most of my life, working in the automotive field—flow charts, information, and tools. This Rock has become all three of these combined. You can laugh—I know it sounds silly. But solid info and facts, or engine parameters from sensors, are fed into your vehicle’s engine computer; without them, your vehicle will not run. I laugh to myself when I realize how, ten years ago, I would never have dreamed that faith, facts, and reason would be applied to my Catholic faith.
John Seguin
Sturbridge, Massachusetts
KEEP STUDYING
Just a quick point regarding your answer to the question whether it is wrong to call ministers "Reverend" ("Quick Questions," June 1996). Although I fully agree with your conclusion, there is a subtle mistake in the reasoning that is of importance. The sentence, "This is contrary to the basic principle of all law: That which is not prohibited is permitted," is not fully accurate. Rather it should have read, "This is contrary to the basic principle of English Common Law." The reason this distinction is important is that the stated principle is not true for every legal system, including that on which the law of the Church is based.
The canon law of the Catholic Church is based on the Roman, not English, model. Having studied canon law in Rome for two years now, one thing has become clear. Although English law says that anything not prohibited is permitted, Roman law says the opposite: Anything not permitted is prohibited. This distinction explains many laws and actions in the Church, which we Americans often do not understand. If we are not clear on this distinction, we will continue to misunderstand the Church. As an American, I think the English view preferable, but it is not the law of the Church, and I think your readers should be informed of this.
Rick S. Conason
Rome, Italy
James Akin’s reply:
Thank you for your concern for detail, and we wish you all the best in your studies. I stick by the answer I gave; I think you are not correct on this point. The only time liberty is not presumed is if a specific code of law states "Nothing not authorized in this code is to be done," but in that case the code itself takes away the presumption of liberty.
Without such an explicit restriction, liberty is always presumed, and this applies to canon law, too.
Lest there be a possibility of error, I called a canon lawyer friend of mind and asked about the idea that the Code has a presumption against liberty. His response was, "How many counter-examples do you want?" (Actually, what he said was, "How many thousand counter-examples do you want?") After naming a number of things which are essential to the ordinary life of Catholics and the Church, but which the Code does not explicitly authorize, he then suggested that we point out that the Code does not give you permission to write us this letter. It was just his jovial way of pointing out that, even under the Code of Canon Law, what is not prohibited is permitted.
GENIUS OF GELINEAU
Your reader asked you to recommend a Catholic alternate to the NPM for musicians who serve at Mass ("Dragnet," Nov. 1996). Please find one! Or start one. I’ll help.
Do you guys sing the Gelineau psalms? I love them, but the choirmaster at my parish, good as he is, isn’t into singing the psalms. The genius of the Gelineau psalms is that, even in the English translation of the French, the words and melodies of the psalms stick in your head for years after hearing them only a few times, and they raise your heart and mind to God whenever you remember them. "For the peace of Jerusalem pray/ Peace be in your house!"
Dave Heywood
Carthage, New York
POLISH PRECEDENT?
In the December "Quick Questions," you said that Catholics can’t fulfill the obligation by going to an Orthodox Liturgy, because the Liturgy lacked certain prayers (notably for the Pope).
I think this is not quite true.
1. If it is not possible to get to a Catholic Church on Sunday (because of distance, blizzards, etc.), the obligation doesn’t apply.
2. Catholics may receive Communion in an Orthodox Church (and vice versa), with the consent of the Catholic and Orthodox bishops concerned. I assume Catholics would receive permission only if visiting a country where there are few Catholic churches and no great antagonism, e.g., Cyprus, Russia.
3. Cardinal Wojtila ruled that Catholics in parts of Poland could fulfil the obligation by attending the Orthodox liturgy—a local ruling but a precedent, perhaps?
Helen Gilmour
Bradford, United Kingdom
LUCIA IS SATISFIED
You were asked if the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary had been done.
It has not been done, because Russia has never been specifically mentioned in a consecration, and it must be done collegially. So your answer was in error.
Dolores Parks
Chicago, Illinois
Editor’s reply:
The current Pontiff has performed more than one consecration of the world to Mary, and he has been in direct contact with Sr. Lucia, the only surviving Fatima visionary, regarding these. Following the most recent consecration, Sr. Lucia stated that she is satisfied that the consecration has been done in accordance with our Lady’s instructions and that the requested consecration has been performed.
WE HAVE A HEADACHE!
I’d like to congratulate everyone at Catholic Answers for the wonderful work you are doing.
I was lurking through some of the religious news groups and noting some of the arguments against the Catholic Church. After a while I had a headache and felt dejected. I was thinking how difficult it must be for the staff at Catholic Answers and other associations in the front lines defending the faith. For what it’s worth, we have you in our prayers and humbly ask God that he always guide you and give you courage.
Eugene Vienneau
Bathurst, New Brunswick
EVOLUTION SLIGHTED
I have gotten interested in the subject of evolution/creation and have read several books by creation scientists. These books absolutely destroy the belief system called evolution. Why doesn’t This Rock treat evolution occasionally?
Joseph A. Doyle
Goleta, California
Editor’s reply:
Take a look at the article starting on page 18 of this issue. It analyzes the Pope’s recent statement on evolution.
SOLITARY MAN
I am a thirty-four-year-old prisoner who is serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole for a crime I committed when I was sixteen. Currently I am in solitary confinement for five months for an infraction of the rules. I would like to correspond with readers of This Rock to develop spiritual friendships. If you wish to be my pen pal, please write. God bless you!
Glenn Winokur, #AM2573
1111 Altamont Boulevard
Frackville, Pennsylvania 17931
SEEN IN SNAPSHOTS
Well, I can say, after seeing your photo, that it is good to see you! I’m heading out the door, but had to let you know how sharp the new format for This Rock is: incredible! I’m looking forward to reading it when I get back home. Congratulations to the whole staff—it looks terrific!
Tony Kovach
Canyon, Texas
INSTRUMENTAL BREAK
Just received my January issue. I really like the new format (not that the old one was bad). Keep up the good work. Your organization was very instrumental in my conversion to Catholicism in 1993.
Dale Anesi
Mission Viejo, California
Editor’s reply:
Welcome to the Church! We love to hear from those we have helped enter or return to the Catholic faith. That’s what keeps us going.
|
