Other Psychic Dangers
I enjoyed Mary Beth Kremski’s article “TV Psychics Want to Be Your Friend” (July/August 2000). There is another aspect of the occult worth bringing to the attention of your readers.
Aside from exposing people to evil spiritual influences, psychics have been known to bankrupt their clients, lead them to spiritual ruin, and cause serious physical harm or even death. These perpetrators prey on the hopeful, the uninformed, and the desperate. They should not be patronized.
I was recently inducted into the “Order of Merlin” signifying 25 years of membership in the International Brotherhood of Magicians. The kind of magic we do involves pulling coins out of a child’s ear or producing a bunny from a top hat. Unfortunately, some of the same techniques that permit me to reveal the name of a selected playing card can be used to convince people that I can foretell the future. (I can’t.)
Magicians do not claim supernatural power. In fact, since at least the time of Harry Houdini, some magicians have devoted significant energy to exposing fraudulent claims of supernatural power. James (“The Amazing”) Randi has been recognized for his tireless efforts to unveil supposed spoon-bender Uri Geller and others.
No one need fear a neighborhood magician at a child’s birthday party, but no one should trust his or her future to a psychic, medium, or spiritualist.
Ronald J. Rychlak
University, Mississippi
Familiar Pattern in Scriptural Teaching
Rev. Ray Ryland’s “Why Is It a Mortal Sin to Miss Mass?” (July/August 2000) was an excellent article. One question, though: Why would Fr. Ryland state that for those who attend Mass and work out their salvation in fear and trembling, it is a fact that “[they] will finally be saved”? The Church teaches that loss of salvation is always just one unrepentant mortal sin away. This follows from all of Jesus’ parables on being watchful until the very end. It is also the reason for the theological virtue of hope. Protestants have no use for this virtue because they are taught that one can know with certainty that he is going to heaven.
I trust that Fr. Ryland does not really believe what he wrote.
Gary Durel
Metairie, Lousiana
Fr. Ryland replies: You rightly state the Church’s teaching that we can have no absolute assurance of salvation. I certainly did not intend to depart from that teaching. Scripture refers repeatedly to our objective status as redeemed creatures, as partakers of the divine nature, as having our citizenship in heaven already, as sharing in eternal life now—and almost always leaves unsaid the fact that despite all this, we have the capacity for losing our salvation. Thus, in the way that I phrased the matter, I was following a familiar pattern in scriptural teaching.
Mariah Carey As Theological Mnemonic
Just a quick point of contention with Brian Kelleher, who reviewed Scott Hahn’s book The Lamb’s Supper: The Mass as Heaven on Earth (“Reviews,” July/August 2000). Mr. Kelleher spent an entire paragraph drubbing Dr. Hahn’s use of punning subheads. He admits that “Hahnheads might find this clever, but it’s a device that should be rethought.”
Dr. Hahn is, first and foremost, a teacher. This “device” is a didactic technique and, in my opinion, an effective one. These “groaners” really do help underscore the points he labors to convey. Mr. Kelleher cites one pun in particular: “Moriah Carry.” What a great way to get us to remember the recurring centrality of Moriah in covenant history!
Dr. Hahn has written a popular book and not a “serious” one. Humor—even in the form of distressingly bad puns—has a real place in such a work, especially when those puns reside innocuously in the subheads. They are the raisins in the oatmeal (or, perhaps, the corn in the chili): nice little tidbits, but not the substance of the meal.
By the way, I liked the old format, but the new is even better. Keep up the good work.
Joe Prioli
Howell, New Jersey
The Man Is Filled with the Holy Spirit
Thank you for the article by Rev. Alex Jones, “Return to Apostolic Traditions” (July/August 2000). This was without a doubt the most well-written, concise, informative, inspiring testimonial to the faith that I have ever read. Rev. Jones managed to accomplish in three-and-a-half pages what volumes of some Catholic texts have been unable to. Not to diminish other writings on the faith—it’s just that Rev. Jones managed to maneuver through most of the complex doctrines and beliefs of the Church in a common-sense manner, utilizing Scripture and historical facts to confirm his position.
It’s obvious that the man is truly filled with the Holy Spirit and I have no doubt that we will be hearing more from him in the future. As a cradle Catholic, I offer him and his congregation a heartfelt welcome to the Church. Praise the Lord!
Gloria Salinas
Vista, California
Swept into an Updraft of Intense Participation
Thanks for Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz’s endorsement of the Ecclesia dei indult Latin Mass (“A Certain Splendor,” July/August 2000). Consider an irony: Radical Traditionalists reject Vatican II. Presumably, this includes the Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum concilium, promulgated in an era when it was often not the case that “the faithful take part fully aware of what they are doing, actively engaged in the rite, and enriched by its effects” (SC 11). Now Radical Traditionalists have co-opted the name of Pope St. Pius X, who fostered more active lay participation in the Mass by his motu proprio on sacred music, Tra le sollecitudini (Among the Concerns), titled in Latin Actuosa articipatio.
One of the best places to learn full participation is at a Latin Mass in full communion with Rome. There can be difficulty when you first attend, with the long stretches of seemingly silent action by the priest and the unfamiliarity of the language. But if you take the trouble to acquire a 1962 Roman Missal (readily available at Latin Masses), you can find yourself swept into an updraft of the most intense, active participation while following the many beautiful devotional prayers that are made all the more intriguing by the Latin tongue.
William Keevers
Citrus Height, California
If We Gave Lifetime Subscriptions, Andrea Would Get One
I’m usually delighted at being able to sit down and read This Rock. However, as I perused the letters in the May/June 2000 issue, my blood pressure began to rise. I cannot believe the number of readers who nit-pick at your articles, attempt to correct you on often-insignificant matters, take traditionalist stabs at the “new order” Mass, and criticize your sense of humor, specifically in reference to the March 2000 cover displaying Mr. Potato Head. Unfortunately, I didn’t see that one, but I suspect I missed out on a good laugh.
If Catholics cannot have a decent sense of humor and poke a little fun at themselves, they risk becoming bitter and defensive. A giant “Thank you!” to the staff at This Rock for all the work you do and all the flak you take. I love your magazine.
Andrea Procher
Barrie, Ontario
Phenomenology No Competition for Thomism
Allow me to wrap up my remarks on Aquinas and reply to the letters from your constituents. I agree that phenomenology is certainly no competition for Thomism, as long as people will admit that Thomism has its flaws (e.g., in the area of sex).
I stated early on that Thomas was one of our best theologians, if not the best. I never implied that phenomenology was the “foundation for human sexuality,” as letter writer Patrick Cole claims (“Letters,” July/August 2000). The only thing I complained about was that Thomas did not categorize sex properly, since he confined it to a legal/biological act. In this case, phenomenology has a better category.
That’s all. I have no grandiose ideas of seeing phenomenology replace or even compete with Thomism. Thank you all for your participation in this exchange. May God give us all the truth we seek.
Robert Sungenis
President, Catholic Apologetics International
Alexandria, Virginia
Read A Lot More
Thank you for the new format. It is much easier to read, and I appreciate that very much. In fact, I read a lot more of it this time than I have in the past.
Betty Cummings
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Greek vs. Aramaic
Being a long time subscriber and lover of This Rock magazine, I am a little perplexed. The magazine editors, article contributors, and the like, when clarifying the Gospel of Matthew, go back to the “original Greek” or refer to the interpolations of an “original Greek” word or phrase. It is only Matthew 16:18 that gets an “Aramaic” translation. Why?
Robert J. Lawrence
Rockford, Illinois
Editor’s reply: Critical commentaries regularly discuss what the Aramaic for something Jesus said may have been. It is the apologetic significance of Matthew 16:18, and the fact that the Aramaic in this case sheds light on the Greek, that leads to this discussion. If other passages become the subject of apologetic controversy in the future, and if the Aramaic underlying the Greek can shed light on it, Catholic apologists will undoubtedly come to focus on them as well.