A Byzantine Beef
As a convert to Catholicism and as one who has done much spiritual reading on the commuter trains to and from Chicago, I found much in common with David Palm [“Breathing Catholic Air,” April 1994]. I identified particularly with his need to become acclimated to Catholic culture, something I was unable to do in 17 years.
I came from high-church Anglicanism: dignified and reverent liturgies with active congregational participation and a theological emphasis on the Incarnation. In Roman Catholicism I found two factions. One tended toward dignified, reverent liturgies, but disdained congregational participation; it placed a strong emphasis on the Passion (e.g. gory crucifixes, Stations of the Cross, Sacred Heart). The other embraced congregational participation, but in an atmosphere reminiscent of a picnic; it tended toward replacing theology with psychology. I found both “cultures” unsuitable. Providentially, I was introduced to the Byzantine Rite. With its active participation in dignified, reverent liturgies and a strong emphasis on the Incarnation, I was acclimated in a few weeks.
As a Byzantine Catholic (I went through the formal process of changing rites), I found Fr. O’Driscoll’s letter, in the same issue, interesting. I know no Byzantine Catholics who believe the filioque to be “misguided Western theological opinion” or “corrupting heresy,” but Father ignores the fact that it is a Western addition to the Niceo-Constantinopolitan Creed, made neither in consultation with the East nor in an Ecumenical Council. This played no small part in the East-West schism.
I know Western Catholics who explain the procession of the Holy Spirit in a way which denies the Father’s role as the source of the Thrice Holy and Thrice Blessed Trinity, even to the point of intimating two principles and two spirations. All Catholics should reject this false understanding of the filioque, but because our (Byzantine) traditional teaching is that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son and as from one principle and one cause, we are probably quicker to reject it. We understand “through” as equivalent to “and,” but only in a sense which preserves the Father’s unique role and a single spiration.
Most Byzantine Rite churches agreed to union with Rome under conditions established at the Council of Florence in 1439: Our traditions would be respected, and we would not add the filioque to the Creed. Unfortunately, in this country our traditions are restricted (we aren’t permitted to ordain married men) and we and other Eastern Rite Catholics are misunderstood by the few Roman Rite Catholics who realize we exist. This Rock seems to ignore us. Some (I hope not Fr. O’Driscoll) even question our Catholicity because our practices and theology differ. Latinizing might please many Roman Rite Catholics, but it would reinforce the common Orthodox opinion that Rome prefers proselytizing to reunion.
Please give some prayerful consideration to explaining the Eastern Rites in a future issue. There are many potential converts put off by the Roman Rite “culture” who would find an Eastern Rite more attractive.
T. Ross Valentine
Plano, Illinois
“God” Spelled Backwards
Everyone has heard people say, “Oh, the rosary–it’s a string of beads with repetitious prayers.” But tell that to my dog! Yes, I said dog.
On a cold day in January, I decided to get a little sunshine while praying my rosary. I was sitting with the beads dangling between my knees. Our dog, about six months old and always looking for affection, ran up to me. He stopped in front of the rosary, gave three low growls, and backed off. I thought it very odd, but kept at my prayers. In a little while, he was back again. This time, when confronting the beads, he stood still and emitted a few plaintive whines. He ran away, then left me alone to contemplate my prayers.
I know that the rosary is a powerful prayer, and the testimony of a dumb animal cannot be denied.
Ella LaFleur
Ville Platte, Louisiana
It’s the Masons, Stupid
As a subscriber to This Rock, almost since its inception, I would like to thank you for helping resurrect my faith. Your relentless defense of the truth enables you to provide and recommend some of the finest apologetic materials available.
In our zeal to defend and reveal the tenets of Catholicism by correcting and countering those who attack our faith, we may be falling for a diversion. Since Pope Clement’s 1738 encyclical In Eminenti, the Church has on several occasions categorically condemned Freemasonry and other secret societies. In 1829 Pope Pius VIII warned that “Their law is untruth, their god is the devil, and their cult is turpitude.”
I recently read a book called En Route to Global Occupation, by Gary Kah, which does an excellent job unmasking Masonic designs. Although Kah is Protestant, his proof with respect to Masonry is incontrovertible–it is evil incarnate. After reading this book and others, it has occurred to me that while we are hacking at the effects of Christian division, we are neglecting the cause. As implausible as it may sound, Masonry and its network of other secret organizations) is the root of our dissension. I cannot recommend strongly enough that your staff look at the real enemy whose cloak has been torn away.
Mark Roberti
Enumclaw, Washington
Editor’s reply: The popes of the last three centuries repeatedly condemned Freemasonry, and Catholics may not join Masonic organizations because, among other things, Freemasonry styles itself a religion, and its tenets, so far as they go (they are not well developed), are largely incompatible with Christianity.
Freemasonry, which began in 1717, cannot be the original cause of the divisions among Christians. After all, the Reformation
started exactly two centuries earlier, in 1517. Whatever else Masons can be blamed for, they can’t be blamed for that.
From Here to Eternity
I noticed the letter in your April 1994 issue from the fellow who had just left the Church after converting 21 years ago. He said he didn’t like the liberals or the conservatives, and in all that time he didn’t make any friends. The love and understanding prescribed by Christ can surely help us to accept those we feel are too liberal or conservative. As for friends, I have only been a Catholic for three months, and I have already made many friends. I hope to stay in the Church for eternity.
Colin Cranmer-Byng
Mississauga, Ontario
Fr. Mahoney Redux
It was with fascination that I read the article, “What Does Father Mean?” by Karl Keating in the April edition of This Rock. The attitude of Fr. Thomas Mahoney [toward Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth] typifies that of priests who seem determined to undercut the Church they are supposed to be serving. I would like to make a few points about his attitude.
To begin with, This Rock has never been antagonistic toward so-called Bible churches. It has only sought to clarify Catholic teaching to those who misunderstand the Catholic Church. The booklet Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth carries on this tradition. As far as “triumphalism” is concerned, the whole purpose of the Church is to triumph, to draw all people to its fold as Christ intended.
Fr. Mahoney makes it seem that the Church should hide itself from public view, as if its very existence were shameful. This is seen in the statement that the Church is sinful and has “credibility problems.” Nothing could be further from the truth; the Catholic Church is holy as an organization (since it is the Mystical Body of Christ on earth), even if some of its members are not. After all, what is the sacrament of penance for? Neither does the Church have credibility problems, since it is the teaching instrument of Christ.
What would Fr. Mahoney’s attitude be toward these feelings of mine, assuming I made the mistake of telling him? Would he order me to report for pastoral counseling? Would he deny me the sacraments until my attitude changed? Who knows–I’m glad I don’t live in his parish.
We probably need to pray for Fr. Mahoney and others like him that, like Paul on the road to Damascus, they may be converted.
John M. Sorenson
Tacoma, Washington
Grounds for Annulment?
Please enter my subscription to This Rock. I hope your magazine grows and flourishes–it is needed to counter the Fr. [Richard] McBriens of this world.
The priest who wrote the critical letter about Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth [“What does Father Mean?”, April 1994], Fr. Tom Mahoney of Cleveland Heights, Ohio, married my husband and me! He is my sister-in-law’s brother-in-law. Imagine my surprise!
Jennette Coyne
North Olmsted, Ohio
Put a Pillar on the Barbie
I am a single mum and a pensioner, and I give out these brochures freely at my parish in the hope of saving souls of the youth and young at heart before they become hardened “modernists.” I promote Catholic Answers at every opportunity, so if I could get any more tracts for free distribution, that would be wonderful. If not, I understand that times are hard, but it would be wonderful if I could obtain some more tracts of the same title as free give-outs. I try to target young Catholics and Protestants as well as misled adults.
Edel O’Hea
Melbourne, Australia
A Parish Full of Pillars
Keep up your excellent work; I pray daily for your apostolate. I am a convert myself (in 1953), from the Dutch Reformed Church of Holland, Michigan, when I was 23. Fr. John O’Brien’s book The Faith of Millions had a lot of influence on my decision–as you know, it is also an excellent work in apologetics. I use it all the time with those under my instruction.
I’m also keen on your beautiful little booklet, Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth. One of my young parishioners (16 years old) went to Denver last year to see the Pope. He came back with a quantity of your important booklets, and we distributed them to each family in my parish (312 of them). Now I would like some more.
You are absolutely correct: There is an awful lot of terrible misunderstanding and misguidance and animosity based purely on a tremendous lack of knowledge of the Catholic Church.
Rev. Max J. Frego
Bay City, Michigan
Camping Cuts Catholics
Enclosed is a copy of Christianity Today, which contains an article concerning the end-time predictions of Harold Camping. In the past, This Rock has mentioned the activities of Camping and Family Radio. It might be beneficial toinclude some additional information concerning the growth and direction of Camping’s ministry. He has become a popular figure in the Protestant world due to his efforts to predict the Lord’s return [which is to occur in September 1994]. He is also encouraging Christians, especially Catholics, to abandon their churches.
In the past Camping has avoided denouncing the Catholic Church on the radio. However, he is now attacking the Church during the “Open Forum” radio call-in show. Many Catholics listen to “Open Forum” and are lured away from the faith.
Robert Sungenis, a former Family Radio staffer who has become a Catholic, recently wrote a book about the prognostications of Harold Camping. He co-authored this book with an Assembly of God minister, Scott Temple. The book is entitled Shockwave 2000 and Harold Camping’s 1994 Debacle and was released in July.
Robert Dacchille
Brooklyn, New York
I Survived Brainwashing
The Spirit is certainly with you as you continue to share the beautiful truth of our faith. Because I was raised in the Seventh-Day Adventist cult, I certainly realize what you’re up against concerning anti-Catholic propaganda and distortions (and outright lies) about the Catholic faith.
I went through many years of Seventh-Day Adventist schooling, but, in spite of the brainwashing, I was still fascinated by and strangely attracted to the true faith. I was received into the Church two years ago and love it more than life itself.
Nanci Squier-Beem
Fresno, California
Rotting Fruit
I’m re-subscribing conditionally. Over the last year the Holy Ghost has led me down the road of traditional Catholicism. I believe in the divinely-revealed truths of the Holy Church. Especially in the dogma of Satan: “The smoke of Satan” has entered the sanctuary, as stated by His Holiness Pope Paul VI. Look at the fruits of the last 30 years that have been rotting in the Church. You will not convert the multitudes you (and I) so badly want to while living in an atmosphere of false ecumenism.
Please treat Archbishop Lefebvre with respect. You are known for your logical defense of the Catholic faith. I challenge you to deeply and prayerfully examine the true traditional movement in the world. You owe it to our Lord Jesus Christ and his beloved mother, Mary. If I sense that you are growing hostile towards Catholics who love the work of Archbishop Lefebvre, I’ll cancel my subscription.
Duane Oden
Beatrice, Nebraska
Anti-Papists in the Ozarks
A few weeks ago I received my first issue of This Rock magazine. I’ve read and re-read it a couple of times and can’t wait to receive the next issues. For the past three-and-a-half years I’ve been living in an area of the country (northern Arkansas) with a small number of Catholics and a large number of Fundamentalists. The local Christian bookstore told the wife of one of my co-workers that they didn’t carry (nor would they order) any Catholic books because, they said, “Catholics aren’t Christians.” I haven’t been back to that store since, so I rely on several Catholic magazines and catalogues to order my books and tapes.
Anyway, I just wanted you to know how much I enjoy your magazine and look forward to future issues. Keep up the good work!
Susan Guest
Cotter, Arkansas
“Lame” Responses
Stop the presses! This Rock has let me down. This may get complicated since this is a response to a response in your letters section, but indulge me. P. M. Aliazzi [May 1994] took Fr. Nicholas Halligan and his article “To Be or Not To Be a Sacrament” [January 1994] to task. I read it and was impressed with the candor and the deep feeling. But I was also anxiously awaiting your response as I have always found This Rock to be sound, orthodox, and clever. You have printed a previous letter of mine so I have no doubt as to your ability to judge clearly and well.
But lo and behold, your answers to Citizen Aliazzi left me flat. He made some very serious and lucid objections to the Novus Ordo, and your reply was almost timid. I too, like Aliazzi, am not and never have been a member of any radical fringe group within or without the Church. But it’s not too late. Like Aliazzi I don’t consider myself a heretic or a revolutionary . . . I’m just somebody who has watched the rubrics of the Mass and all its ancillary paraphernalia crash into a jumbled heap before my eyes.
You say that before the change in the translation from “for many” to “for all” is “liturgically interesting.” That’s like saying the Titanic was an interesting experiment in buoyancy. To paraphrase Chesterton, an inch is everything when you’re balancing the truth. You give an equally lame response to the annulment problem in the U.S. Come one guys, almost 50,000 annulments a year is not a little problem but has to be indicative of something dreadfully wrong.
This letter was not written in blood and I have no intention of severing ties with the subscription office of This Rock. It’s too good a magazine. And I’m not saying P.M. Aliazzi is right and you are wrong. I just wish I could have read your editorial response to him and said, way to go This Rock, you answered another one. This time I couldn’t do that.
Robert Brennan
Van Nuys, California
Apres Moi, Le Deluge
A short while ago the [Tri-Town Community Christian] Library received a most interesting copy of This Rock. We have those using the library who are regularly inquiring into the current state of affairs in the Catholic Church relative to doctrine, ecumenism, etc.
In the “Letters” section there was a note from one Fr. William F. Tallon requesting literature. The editor’s reply was, “We don’t publish [addresses] without prior authorization of the writer (unless we’re struck by an overpowering urge to subject a person to a barrage of tracts and letters–which we might do if it’s for his own good, of course).”
Please publish our name and address. We would greatly appreciate receiving whatever Catholic materials, books, tracts, subscriptions that anyone would wish to send. We would especially be interested in magazines and books of a scholarly nature dealing with Church doctrine, history, biography, but anything will be welcome. We have a large and growing Catholic section, but would like to see it kept current and to have a good breadth of materials dealing with a much wider variety of topics relative to the Church.
Thank you for your kind assistance. I’ll go over to the shelves now and make room for a “barrage” of incoming materials!
David W. Gladden
Tri-Town Comm. Christian Library
17 Park Street
Rockville, CT 06066
Private interpretation
I am a Protestant and a subscriber to This Rock. I read most of the articles in each issue most of the time. Knowing many of the points which are stressed and repeated in your magazine, I am waiting in gleeful anticipation for you to juxtapose two specific articles in the same issue.
The first article will be written to deplore the fact that there are ten thousand or so non-Catholic Christian sects, sub-sects, pieces, and parts of sects out there in the world. The author will point out that this situation is the inevitable result of permitting and encouraging every Jack and Jill to subject the Bible to their own private interpretation and to rely upon that judgment alone for their understanding of Scripture.
The second article will be a true-life saga of “how I found the fullness of faith in Rome and left the errors of my former church behind me.” It will be written by the new convert and will detail that person’s search for, and discovery of, the real truth as presented by Rome.
From my standpoint the fun begins when we see how many perceptive readers write to your magazine to point out the obvious contradiction between the two articles. For the concept of private interpretation so deplored by the author of article one will be seen to be the very concept employed–private study and analysis leading to conversion–by the author of article two. Clearly you will have both damned and praised the same concept or approach in the same breath (or at least in the same issue). In so doing you will have performed the miracle of chopping your logic into bits in article one while producing it whole, complete, and uncut in article two. No mean feat!
Robert E. Shelton
Chicago, Illinois
Editor’s reply: As you know by now, having read this magazine for some time, the Catholic Church is all in favor of using one’s intellect. So that’s not the issue. The issue is one of authority. Are we competent, using our intellects alone, to judge rightly which is the correct interpretation of Scripture? The Protestant says yes, even if he makes a few bows toward the writings of his divines (whom he is anyway free to ignore). The Catholic says no, but he doesn’t say we aren’t to engage in interpretation at all. He just says we are to subordinate our private interpretation to the interpretation of the Church, which has over us the distinct advantage of God’s infallible guidance. The Catholic follows Scripture’s admonition (2 Pet. 1:20) to avoid relying on private interpretation of the sacred text.