|
L e t t e r s
SINNER’S RIGHTS?
I’m getting sick of gays trying to hog the spotlight. How about some pastoral compassion for others who have sexual relationships outside of marriage?
We’re making some progress with unmarried people who are living together, but we have a long way to go. What about the sincere, committed adulterers? There must be some hard cases that we can use to justify their actions.
And since we want to change the Church’s teaching on the basis of today’s social science, we should realize that many psychologists are saying that the only problem with incest and child molestation is the fuss people make about them. If we just accepted them as normal, no problem.
And what about necrophilia—hey, where’s the victim?
Steward Robbins
Via the Internet
NO WIMPS!
Parents are upset. All Catholics are.
A new survey shows 91 percent of Catholics do not like the way we teach religion to the young. For one thing, there are wimp religion books that give youth a wimp Christ. Teens will not follow a wimp. They drop out.
Parents make many sacrifices to send their children to religion classes, and in many places a Pollyanna religion teacher tells them that it is almost impossible to sin and that good ol’ God is going to take everyone to heaven, no matter what. Teens, who are realists, reply: "Then who needs religion?" And they don’t go to church.
We must redouble our efforts to teach Christ, the real Christ, the Gospel Christ. Only with Christ can teens say No to the many evil influences on every side in our sick society. For youth in many places, life is like a jungle: an alarming increase in teen drug use, drinking and driving, violent crimes, sex for fun, a shocking skyrocketing of teen suicides. Teens must have Christ, the real Christ, to see their way through the wilderness of life in our modern world. Everyone must help them.
Fr. Rawley Myers
Colorado Springs, Colorado
OVER-SHELTERED?
I enjoy reading each issue of This Rock. As a convert to the faith, and as someone who is active in our parish’s initiation ministry, it is important for me to know how to explain the tenets of our faith. However, there are some points where I must agree to disagree with the authors, at the risk of being called "heterodox" myself!
The "Raisin’ Saints" article in the May 1997 issued disturbed me somewhat. There is nothing wrong with setting limits on the amount and content of programming watched by children. However, I feel that children should also not be over-sheltered.
The family home is no longer a microcosm of the world in which we live. When children are over-protected from sometimes harsh realities, what will happen to them when "real life" sets in and it isn’t as rosy or as cut-and-dry as Mommy and Daddy made life out to be?
Children need to learn to live in harmony with those who might be considered "different." How else will we teach our children tolerance and respect for others, if we do not introduce them to human differences? After all, I am certain that in Jesus’ childhood, Mary and Joseph didn’t have tax collectors and prostitutes over for dinner on a regular basis. Yet, in his ministry, Jesus went to those people and befriended them and loved them in spite of the "differences." He also told them to go and sin no more, which brings me to my next point.
I particularly disagree with one idea seemingly set forth in the last paragraph of that article. The author mentions an episode of Sesame Street in which different family settings (other than the two-gender, two-parent style) were shown. I understand her concern about the line of "I have one daddy; I have two." However, does this mean that she automatically assumes that "two daddies" are two homosexual men living together and raising a child? Could it not also mean a child with a stepfather and a biological father—a very common occurrence in today’s society? This would have been an ideal time to teach her children—in very basic language—that some people do have different families, but that the Holy Family is the model family.
My last thought: In "Falling Rocks" [May 1997], I had to question "St. Elvis." Are those of us who don’t go around humming Latin hymns all day destined to be tagged as "heterodox"? Does God really prefer one musical style over the other, as long as the purpose of praising him is fulfilled? I think God is most honored by the effort and heart we put into it.
Annette McClellan
Via the Internet
Editor’s reply:
Steven DeLacy, our cartoonist, says that the drawing of Elvis represented no one other than Elvis. But the anonymous winner of our contest imagined that the caricature rerpesented the patron saint of composers of the inferior liturgical music so ably analyzed by Thomas Day in Why Catholics Can’t Sing and in Where Have You Gone Michaelangelo?
DOUBLE DADS
My first thoughts (after reading "TV or Not TV") was that I had better watch my children’s video tapes. After all, Leslie Ryland’s remarks about "two daddies" struck home after remembering the infamous "Heather has two daddies." However, my wife suggested that two daddies in the "Sesame Street" video might be referring to a child with a natural father and a stepfather.
Dave Thiel
Via the Internet
Leslie Ryland replies:
A number of readers wrote or called to suggest that the "two daddies" in the "Sesame Street" song could refer to a natural father and a stepfather. From the context of the song, however, it was clear the children were singing about the people with whom they lived. Under almost any circumstance, a natural father and a stepfather would not be members of the same household.
SELF OPPOSITION
I just wanted to tell you briefly of our conversion. I was brought up in the Assembly of God church. As an adult, I did my share of hopping around various Pentecostal churches and doctrines.
My wife, Chontae, was taught the Church of Christ’s version of Christianity. We observed break-offs in both the Pentecostal and Church of Christ communions.
Protestants have learned to live with the recent idea of an invisible church because they are faced with 20,000 available doctrines. The invisible church concept attempts to argue that it’s okay to have all these doctrines and churches. This idea supports schisms, which are not biblical.
We have also observed Church of Christ followers question the salvation of Pentecostals or other denominations, and vice versa. So the invisible church is opposed to its own members. This kind of behavior might as well be invisible!
We finally heard just a few of the simple historical truths:
1. The Protestant Bible came from the Catholic Church.
2. Jesus and his disciples quoted from the Septuagint. It was good enough for them; it should have been good enough for Martin Luther.
3. There is an unbroken lineage from Peter to Pope John Paul II.
4. When Christ said he was building his Church, he meant right then, not 1,500 years later.
We discovered the historical Church! Our conversion is just one of many that will come. I believe more will convert because all Protestants want the real Church home that Christ intended. They just need to hear what we heard.
I wrote this all to express our appreciation for the ministry of This Rock magazine, Scott and Kimberly Hahn, Karl Keating, Steve Wood, and all those working to bring orphans back into the safety of Christ’s holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church.
Al Belville
LeRoy, Michigan
FISH EVERY FRIDAY
It is a rare occasion when I feel compelled to write to your excellent publication to correct what appears to me to be a misleading statement regarding rules of abstinence as explained in an answer given by Terrye Newkirk in your March 1997 "Quick Questions, page 39: "The Church nowadays requires abstinence from meat only on Fridays of Lent . . . In the early centuries, Christians fasted and abstained on Wednesdays and Fridays—not only in Lent but all year long."
As I understand it, the Church, at least in the Latin Rite, continues to call on Christians to abstain from meat on all Fridays of the year, except solemnities (CIC 1250 and 1251). That discipline has not changed. A revision to the Code of Canon Law added an option for Christians to substitute the primary requirement of abstaining from meat on all Fridays of the year with some other form of penance, such as works of charity and exercises of piety, if approved by the conference of bishops (CIC 1253).
The National Conference of Catholic Bishops in their pastoral statement of November 18, 1966, said the following on the subject: "Abstinence from flesh meat on all Fridays of the year is especially recommended to individuals and to the Catholic community as a whole." I am not aware of any more recent statements that alleviate this discipline.
Peter V. Marlow
Castaic, California
Terrye Newkirk replies:
Forgive me if my answer was unclear. The question pertained only to abstinence during Lent, hence the "of Lent" modifying "Fridays" in my sentence. I did not intend to address the question of regular Friday abstinence. You are correct that abstaining from meat on all Fridays remains the normative penitential act for Catholics. In the United States, the bishops’ conference has allowed Catholics to choose some other form of Friday penance, but the requirement of marking the day remains: "The fifth precept ("You shall observe the prescribed days of fasting and abstinence") ensures the times of ascesis and penance which prepare us for the liturgical feasts; they help us to acquire mastery over our instincts and freedom of heart."
THIS ROCK’S FOR YOU!
I want to start a Catholic radio station. I remember reading in an issue of This Rock about a man who helps people like me get started.
Would you please send me any information that would be useful? I need all the help I can get. I thank God for all of you at Catholic Answers. You are doing a great work for the Lord. If we could only teach our own people their faith, we could change a lot in this world.
John Bohaty
Cornell, Wisconsin
Editor’s reply:
You should find all the information you need in this issue. God bless your endeavor!
CAPITAL OFFENSE
I was recently reading through some of the literature published by your company: Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth and a pamphlet entitled, "The Forgiveness of Sins." As I was reading, I noticed something that I thought was a typo. The pronouns referring to God, such as He, Him, Who, and Whom, are not capitalized.
After continuing my reading, however, I noticed that nowhere in the book were those words capitalized. I, to say the least, was appalled. In the Pillar book alone, I found at least seventy-two of these references. The English book I used for verification was Warriner’s English Grammar and Composition, copyright 1982, which says that the only time these words should not be capitalized is when referring to a pagan god.
I was surprised to see how many of the Pillar books had been in print (over 1 million, according to the cover). With this many in circulation, I hope you went back and made the corrections. I sincerely hope you have received more than this one letter to point out this serious mistake. If you haven’t, it must mean that the people who read your material are not paying close enough attention.
Elizabeth M. Leahy
Bloomington, California
Terrye Newkirk replies:
Thanks for your obvious concern for the reverence owed to God. Lower-casing the divine pronouns is not a mistake. Catholic Answers follows the current editorial style used by most Catholic publishers of not capitalizing these words. No irreverence is intended: Our concern is for ease of reading. We do capitalize all nouns that refer to God, including Eucharist and Blessed Sacrament. If you examine the Catechism, approved Catholic Bible translations, and all Vatican documents, you will find that they capitalize even less than we do. Capitalizing the pronouns is seldom done in other languages, by the way.
Editor's reply:
By the way, using the lower case was the style recommended by Msgr. Ronald Knox (1888-1957), famed translator of the Bible. (It was his translation that I used in Catholicism and Fundamentalism.) In a book explaining how he translated the Bible, he noted that the original languages don’t use special orthography for divine pronouns. He recommended following the Bible’s example.
HAUGEN DROSS
I’ve noticed that you’ve printed a few letters on liturgical abuses lately; please continue. Liturgy is the means by which the common man is exposed to the new theology. Bad worship is bad teaching.
In the celebration of the sacred rites, we are assailed by the liturgical equivalents of Raymond Brown and Richard McBrien. The elite clique of composers that holds a near monopoly on Church music is the musical mouthpiece of liberalism and neo-Modernism, of "Don’t worry, be happy" catechetics.
It churns our lyrics that are monotonous, vague, subjective, sentimental, self-absorbed, and self-congratulatory. These texts are then set to musical forms, arrangements, and instrumentation that are bound to make you get out your cut-off jeans and nose ring. Seriously, this is music that could hardly offend an agnostic.
Take, for example, the popular entrance hymn, "Gather Us In," by Marty Haugen. The subject of this song is clearly "us" or "we"—God is mentioned using only the pronouns "you" and "your." Isn’t this just peachy? None of those nasty masculine words, such as "Father," "Lord," or "him." After what feels like a million references to the gathering community (a commentary on Catholic tardiness?), the song actually makes reference to the Eucharist—unfortunately to consubstantiation, rather than transubstantiation. The song concludes with a derogatory reference to "buildings confining."
At this point the congregation, if not still reading the bulletin, is experiencing a spiritual crisis.
I could quote a song after song from our modern hymnals and missalettes. Are they not giddy vehicles for the new theology? My point is: This trash demands an educated rebuke from the theologian/apologist. Please continue to address the subject in your magazine.
Timothy Keefe
Westfield, Massachusetts
TAPES NEEDED
We are in the process of beginning a radio station in our mission and need some Christian music on audio tapes/CDs.
Also, do your readers have any evangelization tapes available in English or Spanish?
If they do, please ship them to:
Fr. Richard Gant
Catholic Mission
Benque Viejo, Belize
Central America
CATHOLIC ONE-LINERS
I would like to quote heavily from things listed on your site in a free newsletter that I give away in my church. I would like your permission to do so.
The newsletter is focused on current events in the Church and the Church in the world. I type up a list of one-liners. It is presently news only. But I would like to put a quote in it as a method of teaching those who would literally never hear anything about Catholic truth otherwise; I am talking about Catholics, you know.
Steve Graessle
Via the Internet
Editor’s reply:
Thanks for your efforts to spread the truth. You may quote short passages from our tracts and articles without seeking permission, so long as the source is acknowledged, but the full text may not be uploaded to another site without written permission. Entire tracts are available for sale from us. If you need large quantities of article reprints, give us a call.
|
