In Whose Name?
I was glad to see modern Sabellianism treated by James Akin in the January 1994 issue. I’ve had a number of contacts with their ranks over the years, and they (United Pentecostals and Apostolics) seem to represent the most narrow-minded, sectarian, and aggressive Pentecostals.
As Mr. Akin noted, “Oneness Pentecostals” who deny the Trinity claim that baptizing using the words “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19)–this is the way Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants (including all other Pentecostals) baptize–is unscriptural and incorrect.
They say that “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are simply titles, not names (or `the name’) of God.” They quote Acts 2:38 and 10:48 as their “proofs” that we can baptize only “in the name of Jesus.”
Well, your “Fathers Know Best” section clearly pointed out the early Church’s belief in the Trinity. And we know that early extra-biblical Christian writings such as the Didache contradict the Oneness Pentecostals’ insistence on the “Jesus-only” baptismal formula. But why don’t Oneness Pentecostals simply compare John 16:23-24 with Matthew 6:9 and Luke 11:12? There Jesus instructs us to pray “in my name” (John 16:23-24), yet the actual words he teaches to say are “Our Father . . .” (Matt. 6:9, Luke 11:12). So if we pray the way Jesus taught us, we are not praying “in the name of Jesus” (according to Oneness Pentecostals’ own reasoning).
Either Jesus was in error (as were the early Church and all Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants throughout history), or Oneness Pentecostals are.
Steve Neef
Lafayette, Louisiana
Sheep-Stealing in India
Though our main concern is the pro-life issue, all the members of our Trust are Roman Catholics. Here in Bombay, as well as other parts of India, the so-called Evangelistic sects are sheep-stealing and pulling people away from their Catholic faith. We want to stop this trend.
Could you please send us whatever literature you can which will help us to stop this sheep-stealing? While we are not in a financial position to reprint books, we would be glad if you will send us booklets which will help our Catholics to understand our faith more thoroughly. If you could send us these booklets as soon as possible, we would be grateful.
Kevin L. Fernandes
Abundant Life Education
Research Trust
Bombay, India
Synapses and Synoptics
God’s peace and joy be yours in Christ Jesus! As a seminarian, then a deacon, and now a priest for the Diocese of Peoria, I have enjoyed your work and the publication This Rock. Apologetics is so much needed in our Catholic Church today, and your efforts will reinvigorate Catholic schools and seminaries to start teaching this subject once again.
Your article “Problems With the Synoptic Problem” [March 1994] was excellent. However, I wonder how many readers understood why such a topic, usually reserved for biblical journals, should appear in the pages of This Rock?
To anticipate their questions, I offer the following answer for those who are not aware of the degree to which the synoptic problem is only the tip of the iceberg for much of the Church’s problems with liberal theology. While much of the discussion is heady and esoteric, the ramifications of adopting an uncritical approach to the historical-critical method have greatly affected Catholic universities and seminaries.
What happened to mainline Protestant denominations in the nineteenth century is occurring in the Catholic Church in the twentieth. Scripture is being robbed of the gospel message by explaining away the words of Jesus Christ as belonging to someone else. A suspicion arises about the sacred text, and modernists and liberals use this suspicion to batter any orthodox position, especially in Christology.
[Dei Verbum, no. 12, reads]: “But since sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted with its divine authorship in mind, no less attention must be devoted to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture, taking into account the Tradition of the entire Church and analogy of faith, if we are to derive their true meaning from the sacred texts.”
This approach effectively cuts off any competition by those who pick and choose which “Jesus” to follow–a Marcan “Jesus” or a Johannine “Jesus,” etc. Unfortunately, most seminary professors are 30 to 50 years behind and still infect innocent seminarians with such positions, which Protestant professors have long since abandoned.
Rev. Timothy Sauppe
Rock Island, Illinois
Easy to Follow or Swallow?
Just a quick note to tell you how much I enjoyed B. Orchard’s “Evolution of the Gospels” [March 1994]. His writing style is for me perfect–easy to understand, easy to follow. He had me pretty much convinced it was Matthew, Luke, Mark. He tied it all together very nicely.
Then I turned the page and there was Karl Keating with the “problem with the problem.” I didn’t find that piece as easy to follow; it was a bit jumbled. Now I am probably as confused about who did what, where, why, as anybody. I suppose it’s sort of like the Kennedy conspiracy theory; we’ll never know for sure unless there’s a Dead Sea New Testament out there somewhere.
Donald Killmeyer
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Morning After Pill okay?
ON page 42 of the February 1994 issue, This Rock assumes that the use of the “morning after pill” by a rape victim is direct abortion. Originally I too made that simplistic assumption, but then I asked some relevant questions and applied the principles of Catholic morality to the question. My preference would be to skip this whole issue, but my passion for the truth bids me to share a few thoughts with you, however inconvenient.
The first question is simply: What is abortion? What exactly falls inside the boundaries defining this immoral act? I won’t pretend to have an exhaustive answer, but what the Church condemns under the heading of abortion usually seems to involve a direct assault on the fetus in some way or another.
The second question is: Does the victim of rape have a moral obligation to provide room in her womb for this egg containing innocent new human life? (A point of significance is that a woman who voluntarily engages in sex would have such an obligation because of her free choice.)
On the assumption that the “morning after pill” works by preventing the fertilized egg from ever implanting in the womb, but does not otherwise harm or injure that egg, and that a victim of rape has no a priori moral obligation to nourish this life, the moral issue would seem to depend on the application of the traditional moral principles covering the case of “two-fold effect.”
Whether there is sufficient moral good to the victim of rape not being forced to carry this reminder and extension of her anguish to balance accepting the evil implicit in the death of a newly-conceived human life, which so desperately needs the environment only a woman’s womb can provide, is something I’ll leave to the moral experts.
It would be interesting to see what that hospital chaplain might say on the issue. Perhaps he is neither incompetent nor immoral.
James J. Harris
San Diego, California
Editor’s reply: The very purpose of the “morning after pill” is to prevent not fertilization, but implantation. That’s how the pill works, and thus it works abortifaciently. Assuming the woman knows what the pill is supposed to do, if she wills its use, she wills its effect, which is abortion, not contraception. There is no question here of the double effect.
You argue that a woman has “no a priori moral obligation” toward this new life, but in fact she does–she has an obligation not to kill it, even though she didn’t will its coming into being. (Your neighbor didn’t will your coming into being, but he has an obligation nevertheless not to kill you.)
You don’t wish to have the rape victim “reminded” of the crime perpetrated against her, and you think that by eliminating her child she will eliminate the memories and the anguish. It doesn’t work that way. The empirical evidence suggests the opposite: Rape victims who abort their children end up anguished not only over the rape, but over the abortion.
If They’re agin it, I Like It
I am a 27-year-old priest, the youngest in the Diocese of Charlotte Amalie in the U.S. Virgin Islands. I was ordained less than a year ago. After hearing some derogatory remarks against This Rock magazine (especially the term “rigid,” which as you surely know when spoken by a liberal often means “doctrinally sound” and/or “morally decent”), I quickly reached the conclusion that there had to be something very good about your magazine. A religious sister lent me some past issues, and I could confirm my suspicions: This Rock is a good thing.
I regularly offer the Mass for the Holy Father, Mother Angelica, Fr. Paul Marx, and all the other defenders of the truth. Be sure that I will join you to the rest of the elect in the Masses I celebrate for them.
Rev. Alejandro Sanchez Munoz
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands
Insatiable–and Glad of It
My wife has been subscribing to your magazine for about three years now. I first became aware of This Rock shortly after I met her in 1992, and, although I am not certain, I think it (along with Catholicism and Fundamentalism) played at least a small part in my decision to enter the Church, which I did on All Saints Day of that year. However, I do know that since then my admiration for your magazine has grown by leaps and bounds. Most periodicals seem to be filled with cotton candy, but yours is meat and drink to me. In fact, my only complaint so far is that your issues seem too short: When I finish one, I’m usually still hungry for more.
F.P. Johnston
Columbus, Ohio
Objection Sustained
Your answer about a “mitochondrial Eve” [“Quick Questions,” January 1994] is out of date. The claim that a common ancestor had been discovered was reported in Newsweek on January 11, 1989. It was a cover story. On March 2, 1992, Newsweek reported that the theorist had been mistaken. I’ve enclosed a copy of the second report (which was not a cover story).
Sean Murphy
Powell River, British Columbia
Will Publisher Fess Up?
The book We Left the Jehovah’s Witnesses features the testimony of six ex-JWs and their spouses who, at the time the book was first published in 1974, were all “born-again” Christians. Among the ex-JWs were a few who were also ex-Catholics.
For the most part the ex-Catholics were fairly dispassionate in their attitude toward Catholicism, though a general sense of the wrongness of the Catholic “system” pervaded the book, especially in the comments of the book’s editor.
The one exception to the dispassion of the ex-Catholics was Kenneth Guindon. Mr. Guindon described his conversion in his late teens to the JWs from Catholicism as an exchange “of one form of slavery for another.” The title of the chapter written by Mr. Guindon was “Twice Enslaved–Free in Christ!” Mr. Guindon ended his story with his resignation from the JWs in early 1973.
It was most interesting to read the continuation of Mr. Guindon’s biography in the February 1994 issue of This Rock. He picks up the story line where his book chapter left off, merely alluding to his JW experience but describing in some detail his life as a Baptist minister. His eventual return to the Catholicism of his early youth was an especially gratifying climax to the story. We can all rejoice with him and give thanks to almighty God for his son’s vocation to the priesthood.
In light of the subsequent events in Mr. Guindon’s life, it is rather surprising that We Left the Jehovah’s Witnesses is still available and is still carrying Mr. Guindon’s story with its anti-Catholic spin. Granted, Mr. Guindon’s reconversion is irrelevant to the main theme of the book, and it would probably also be too expensive to change the galleys. However, it is also a fact that the principal subsidiary theme of the book is that the ex-JWs profiled have found freedom in Christ by being “born again” [into “Bible Christianity”]. They are not “unregenerate” members of theologically liberal churches.
So, it is not unlikely that the publisher, the Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company–the same folks who bring us that perennial best-seller, Loraine Boettner’s Roman Catholicism–would be inclined to dilute so important a thrust of the book now that we, at least in the case of Kenneth Guindon, “know the rest of the story.”
Anthony F. Britti
Hagerstown, Maryland
So Dynamic I Fell Asleep
I thoroughly enjoyed James Akin’s article [“Choosing a Bible Translation”] in the April 1994 This Rock. I cut it out to keep. I am not sure that the Jerusalem Bible is all that “dynamic.” A word or so about the Navarre Bible also would have been nice. Some time you might like to do articles on prophecy, the importance of the literal sense, and the necessity of choosing the more difficult solution when we’re on the horns of a dilemma.
Rev. Denis O’Brien, M.M.
Dallas, Texas
Editor’s reply: James Akin said the Jerusalem Bible’s translation follows the dynamic equivalence method. He wasn’t so gauche as to say the translation turned out to be (yawn) dynamic.
Professional and Mocking
I’d like to respond to Janice T.’s letter in the February 1994 issue. First, Janice, let me say I agree with you completely about Catholic Answers’ debating ability. I have “The ‘Bible Only’ Debate” on tape, and I was not only impressed, I was convinced.
To Mr. Madrid and Mr. Keating, congratulations and thank you! I learned a great deal from what must have been a lot of work on your parts and have brought the topic up in conversation with many of my Protestant friends (I even led a sola scriptura debate in my interdenominational Bible study!). My criticism in the December issue was of the magazine, not Catholic Answers’ debates. I questioned why This Rock was so sarcastic and mocking.
You’re right; Catholic Answers presents itself very professionally in debate. But some sections of This Rock (the back cover, for example) leave a bad taste in my mouth. Yes, the “Dragnet” section is often funny, but it isn’t something I’d invite my Protestant friends to read. I hope you see the difference I’m making between the magazine and the apologists. I would love to meet Mr. Keating and Mr. Madrid and shake their hands. I just can’t agree with everything I find in This Rock.
I’d like to encourage everyone to “examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good” (1 Thess. 5:21). There’s a lot of good in This Rock, but some bad, and that’s okay. God can and will use it. God bless!
Dan Ward
Plattsburgh, New York
The Real Mary
I really enjoyed your booklet Refuting the Attack on Mary. It brought me to a far greater understanding of our Lady than I have ever had. I would also like to share it with others that they may also be blessed with a true belief in Mary. I am very impressed with your ministry as I was once almost led out of my Catholic faith by well-meaning Fundamentalists. Through a series of miracles and your ministry, I was led back into our wonderful faith. My life (and my family’s) has continued to be transformed with enlightenment and growth, through my faith, as never before.
Rachel Vallone
Tucson, Arizona
Reducing Expectations
I found James Akin’s article, “Changing the Sabbath” [December 1993] to be excellent despite the complaints of one reader (Mr. McGlynn), who seemed to have expected that an article of less than two pages should definitively answer all possible objections. I believe this highlights a shortcoming we Catholics possess.
We expect to read one short article or to hear one short homily and have all the answers. When this doesn’t happen we complain about the writer or the priest. The article or homily should represent only a starting point for us. If we want to understand and be prepared to defend Catholic beliefs and practices, we must be prepared to study and research the matter on our own. A little hard work will go a long way.
Salvatore Magluilo
Dublin, Georgia
Get “Tube”-ular, Dude!
I was interested in the letter of Leo L. Cersovski of Oregon [April 1994], who said, “What are needed more than anything in this hemisphere are some great Catholic evangelists–gifted orators with the zeal of the apostles and the knowledge and ability to use the media as has Billy Graham. . . . Picture this scene sometime in the future: A world-renowned Catholic evangelist speaking to a vast audience and Catholic Answers distributing 1,000,000 copies of Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth.”
Hasn’t Mr. Cersovski ever heard of Mother Angelica and her Eternal Word Television Network? It is on 24 hours a day, seven days a week–not just a few times a year like Billy Graham. It was by watching EWTN that I first learned about Pillar of Fire, Pillar of Truth and This Rock!
Grace A. Tribur
St. Paul, Minnesota
Bible Belt School Bias
Did you listen to the reporters for the Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis funeral? They kept saying that anti-Catholicism is dead. Gosh, what rock have they been living under? Especially here in Bob Jones University territory. I’ve already run into it four times this week, and this is a slow week. I am tired of it, and I am doing everything I can to inform people of the truth, especially the BJU’s who come to my door.
I teach religious education at St. Mary’s in Greenville, and when I asked my students if they were ever given any problems because of being Catholic, everyone raised his hand. I now make a point of teaching the children how to defend their faith correctly.
My son had a math teacher who was a BJU graduate. Russell was an honor student, but in her class he could not get past a “‘D.” I suspected religious bigotry, but I told Russell to just get through the year ( he was making “A’s” in everything else). Well, the next year he went back to making “A’s” in math. But my other son, who always made “B’s” and “‘C’s” in math, had her next. Now he was getting “‘F’s” as well as mental and verbal abuse.
I finally had enough and went to the school, but they told me I didn’t know what I was talking about. He would do his homework, and she would send home notes saying he didn’t do it. I started doing his homework for him, and then I got her. She would mark things wrong that were correct.
Toward the end of the year I told Adam not to worry about it, and just let everything go. So we start a new year, with a new teacher, and last week he received an Academic Excellence award in math – he made all “A’s” this year. I told the principal that I rest my case as far as religious bigotry is concerned.
I can tell you a story about a child being expelled from school for standing up for the Catholic faith. It is really getting bad, especially here, with Bob Jones, Holmes, and other Bible colleges. So I want to do what I can.
Ginger Chastain
Marietta, South Carolina
Valtorta Retorta
In the March 1994 issue of This Rock, “Quick Questions” presented a response concerning The Poem of the Man-God, which was based on the findings of the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith). Ordinarily this would have been sufficient condemnation of any work did it not unwittingly perpetrate the arrogant conceit and intellectual dishonesty of two modernist priests (Frs. Pepe and Berutti) who infested the Holy Office in the 1950s.
Sometime within the past two years, Fr. Mitch Pacwa composed a pejorative two-page article on Maria Valtorta’s masterpiece, for the Catholic Twin Circle. Fr. Pacwa repeated (in greater detail) the same misinformation contained in your magazine. Before Fr. Pacwa’s article appeared, I had already purchased and read all five volumes (each containing an average of 800-plus pages) on what I considered to be a reliable recommendation. I was therefore able to check out first-hand several accusations of “theological error,” “sensuality,” and “exegetical falsehoods.” One after the other I found the quoted statements of Fr. Pepe and Msgr. Berutti to be arbitrary imaginings, uncandid fabrications, and plain eisegesis!
Their constant complaint concerned a lack of “scientific” content in the Poem. Actually, the entire New Testament, plus part of Acts, is contained literally and episodically within the five volumes, as well as long passages from the Old. What makes it come alive is the revelation of what came before and after the NT passages and narrative.
Jesus provided Valtorta with 700 visions and many dictations, which were carefully recorded so that the faithful would have a more complete picture of the life and times of Jesus, Mary, Joseph, et. al. (too often only briefly sketched in the Bible).
I have read many lives of Christ, and the Poem came through with such clarity, credibility, and warmth that I was at once fascinated, edified, and uplifted as never before by this “rare revelation” of faith, love, and humanity manifested by Jesus and his family (not to mention their humility and self-sacrifice toward each other and those they encountered).
Any consideration of the Poem of the Man-God as “a mountain of childishness, of fantasies, and of historical and exegetical falsehoods, diluted in a subtly sensual atmosphere” is not only ludicrous and inappropriate, but plainly malevolent. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who also lacked the time and incentive to actually read the Poem, rubber-stamped the condemnation and complicated the error. Pope Pius XII said of the Poem: “Let it be printed as written,” defining it as neither ordinary nor extraordinary. “Whoever reads it will know.” How about someone from This Rock reading the Poem and giving a fair evaluation of this chef d’oeuvre? Then we will all know!
Clifford Roell
Cincinnati, Ohio
Editor’s reply: 1. The Poem of the Man-God was put on the Index because it reputedly contained doctrinal or moral errors. No one denies it was put on the Index, but some say it shouldn’t have been. Circulating vague charges about two priests (perhaps long dead and unable to defend themselves) who “infested” the Holy Office forty years ago is no way to demonstrate that putting the work on the Index was a mistake.
Besides, what proof do you have that these priests were modernists? Have you read any of their works? Can you even name any of their works? Had you even heard of them aside from the Valtorta controversy?
2. Valtorta’s publisher claims that an oral imprimatur was granted by Pope Pius XII, even though popes don’t give imprimaturs and imprimaturs are never oral. This looks suspiciously like false advertising.
3. There is no corroboration that Pius XII ever said about Valtorta’s work, “Let it be printed as written.”
4. There is no evidence that Pius XII ever read The Poem of the Man-God, so why complain that Cardinal Ratzinger may not have?
5. In her tone and lack of reserve Valtorta’s Mary seems quite unlike the Mary found in the Gospels, a woman of a few well-chosen words. Valtorta’s Mary is a blabbermouth.
6. The authenticity of Valtorta’s revelations cannot be proved by the fact that some readers are edified by her account. Other readers have been disedified, even scandalized. If edification of readers or followers were the criterion for authenticity, then such hoaxes as Bayside would have to be classified as authentic.