Are Catholics really Catholic?

[JReducation]

I have always wanted to write a book raising the question, why Catholics are not Catholic. My superior has always told me that it’s not time yet. Today, I asked if I could write a thread on this topic and I got permission to do so. Maybe it will serve as an outline for that book that I have wanted to write, if I ever get permission to do so.

Anyway, let’s move on. I have spent all of my religious life working on the writings of the mystics. When I’m not doing that, I’ve worked on the issues and questions concerning the sacredness of life. My work and studies have allowed me to come into contact with many wonderful people. They are not all Catholics. Many are not even believers, but all of them are wonderful people, even those who are enemies of the Church. When you sit down with them over a cup of tea and biscuits you find that they are enchanting, with delightful personalities and many have a sharp wit about them.

One day, a non-Catholic asked me, “Friar, why are your people not Catholic?” I have to admit that the question confused me. I said, “Excuse me? Come again?” He repeated himself, “Why are your people not Catholic?”

“What do you mean?” I said.

“Well, your people claim to believe about Mary, the mass, communion, saints and all that Catholic stuff. But when you’re people are told what to do and what not to do by your leaders, they groan, moan and worse. Some of them don’t give a *@)$ about publically embarrassing your priests, bishops and even your pope. When I was in the army, the one thing that we all understood was the that commander was the boss. We didn’t have to agree with him. Heck, most of us didn’t even like him. But he was the CO and we did as we were told.”

I thought about it and then said, “Well, for starters, the Church no longer throws people in the brig. Though I confess that at times I wish we still had a few dungeons around. But that’s just not the way that we operate. People feel safer throwing stones at the clergy and religious than they would at the commanding officer in the army. I think that the Church, despite her many faults and those of the clergy and religious, it is still trusted. Most Catholics know that in the end, they can shoot me down. They can call me names. They can even ignore me. But the one thing that will never happen is that I will stop loving them. A friar, a monk, a priest or a bishop, no matter what his sins may be, is usually a good person at heart. At best, he will get frustrated, throw up his arms and shout a few times. Eventually, he calms down and he continues to love the people whom God has put in his path.”

My friend looked at me and smiled. “I guess too much safety can be as bad as not enough.”

“Hmmm, I though to myself. He may have a point here.” So I asked him to tell me more.

“You see Friar, I have never followed any religion. But if I were going to follow one, it would be Catholicism. All of its teachings are logical. They’re rooted in history, philosophy, art, nature, mysticism and certainly a lot of mystery that I don’t understand. But what has always kept me away from the Catholic Church is the fear that there is something that Catholics know that they’re not telling.” I was little confused here and asked him to elaborate. So he continued.

“I see the hatred with which Catholics react to whatever they’re told by their priests and bishops, especially when it has anything to do with money, politics, birth-control, abortion or sex. It’s not just disagreement. It’s actual hatred. When you disagree with someone, you lay out the opposing point. When you hate, you try to show the world that your opponent is a fool, a hypocrite, a liar. You paint him in the worse possible light. That’s what Catholics do to their religious, clergy and Church. The way I figure it is that they have little dirty secret on their Church that I must have missed. But that confuses me. If they don’t trust what their leaders say about the normal things of life, why do they believe the nonsense about bread becoming Jesus or why do they believe that the interpretation that priests and theologians give to the bible are correct?”

I thought about that for a while. We were walking, so we walked in silence for a few hundred feet. It suddenly struck me. I felt very sad. Here was a man who was searching for the truth. He was searching for faith. Here he was a the door of the Church, wanting to enter, but he was afraid to do so. He was not afraid because of our faith. He was afraid because of our behavior toward everything that represents our faith and those who teach us the faith. I felt ashamed, not of our faith. I felt ashamed of our behavior. I had to wonder, how many people have I frightened away.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Prairie_Rose]

As a recently new Catholic and new to the CAF, these are my thoughts on the behavior of some Catholics. When I went thru RCIA my Priest said that God loves us and we are to love each other as much as we profess to love God. But for some Catholics that post on these forums, there seems to be alot of negative emotion being “shared” definitely not LOVE.
There’s always conflict in posts regarding the manner in which we receive Communion - some argue rather forcefully that their way is the only proper way. Arguments about
whether girls should be allowed to be Altar servers. The role of women as Lectors and EMHC’s. Or even the need for EMHC’s. Some that call themselves Catholic will not go up to receive Communion from anyone other than the Priest.
All these “things” in my opinion are just secondary to what we really should be focusing on - Loving God and loving each other. Our Church is being torn apart from the inside - from it’s very own members. And to those looking inside the sanctuary doors for salvation - alot of them only see mass confusion. I just have to wonder what God sees when he looks inside the sanctuary doors???

 

[po18guy]

I agree with Jesuit Fr. Mitch Pacwa here. He is a “paint-by-number” Catholic. He likes the picture just as it is and stays inside the lines. Those lines were drawn with the blood of martyrs. To venture outside of them strikes me as an assumption that one is somehow superior to the Apostles, Church fathers and theologians who, over nearly two millennia, have sweated the details of doctrine, and shed their blood in defense of those doctrines. How dare I feign superiority - much less parity with the greats of the faith?

 

[JReducation]

As a recently new Catholic and new to the CAF, these are my thoughts on the behavior of some Catholics. When I went thru RCIA my Priest said that God loves us and we are to love each other as much as we profess to love God. But for some Catholics that post on these forums, there seems to be alot of negative emotion being “shared” definitely not LOVE.
There’s always conflict in posts regarding the manner in which we receive Communion - some argue rather forcefully that their way is the only proper way. Arguments about
whether girls should be allowed to be Altar servers. The role of women as Lectors and EMHC’s. Or even the need for EMHC’s. Some that call themselves Catholic will not go up to receive Communion from anyone other than the Priest.
All these “things” in my opinion are just secondary to what we really should be focusing on - Loving God and loving each other. Our Church is being torn apart from the inside - from it’s very own members. And to those looking inside the sanctuary doors for salvation - alot of them only see mass confusion. I just have to wonder what God sees when he looks inside the sanctuary doors???

It’s interesting how you pointed this out. I just responded to another thread on immigration. I tried to share the spirituality of Saints Francis of Assisi, Francis de Sales, Alphonse Ligouri, Elizabeth Ann Seton and Vincent de Paul and their perspective on the poor, charity, compassion and the bishops. It went completely over the head of one poster. He (I think) came back with how the laity has to dictate to the bishops what they can and cannot say.

I thought to myself, whatever happened to learning from the saints? This has been one of the distinguishing marks of Catholic and Orthodox spirituality as opposed to Protestant spirituality. The response was almost Protestant. The idea that bishops are subject to the faithful is a very Protestant idea. What our saints have always modeled for us is a devotion, reverence and submission to the bishops. Often the bishops were not nice to them.

I’m remember the new Australian saint, whose name escapes me right now. She was excommunicated by the local bishop and she continued to speak of him with great reverence and to treat him with great respect. I read a little about that fateful day. She cried herself to sleep, but did not reproach him. Eventually, the bishop lifted the excommunication and approved her work.

Our own St. Francis was told by the pope to go sleep with pigs. Francis went outside, found a pig-pen and slept there that night. Pope Innocent had a change of heart and approved Francis’ request and blessed his new order.

Mother Teresa was told not to found the Missionaries of Charity. She was told this every time for three years. Each time, she prayed to God to make this drive to found the Missionaries of Charity go away. Eventually, the Archbishop of Calcutta gave permission.

Elizabeth Ann Seton was ordered to take her five young children to Emitsburg, MD to found a new school. When she got there, the building’s roof was incomplete. It snowed and as a result one of her children died. She prayed and it was revealed to her that Mary had made the same sacrifice and her son too had died. Elizabeth never questioned Archbishop Caroll again. She lost two more children because of the hardship that they endured.

There was a time when Catholics venerated and imitated these saints. We wanted to be like them. Today, when we are exposed to them, we want to ignore them in favor of our modern conventional wisdom.

We want to kill over communion on the tongue vs communion in the hand, but are willing to die in order to humble? Are we willing to do as the saints did, to lay aside our wisdom for the sake of true spirituality?

True spirituality is ascetic. It is willing to suffer for the sake of the beloved and those whom he loves.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[fish90]

Hello Brother,

Orthodox Catholicism is simply very tough to follow especially in the world of today where evil has more means to expand into every fabric of our lives.

I find these to be very troubling facts contributing to Catholic decline.

1.) Temptation- Too easy to explain right.

2.) Hierarchical failure- This news report by lifesitenews.com shows the Catholic identity of Italy collapsing even though 94% of Italian children are enrolled in Catholic elementary schools. Now, I will admit there are always different reasons and not every reason is the same, but this failure would ultimately end with the hierarchy. Am I incorrect?
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10080901.html

3.) The “Niceness heresy”- I made this one up. Far too often the hard truths of Catholicism are forgotten for the intent of being nice on the part of the laity especially.
Some examples:

“I think I will skip Church, Jesus would not mind.”
“Why would Jesus care about women priests, everybody should deserve a chance?”
“My sins aren’t all that bad right?”
“The sin of … is not that evil right?”

Let’s not forget about contemporary liberal thought on egalitarian “rights.”

4.) I would also propose this new idea that I have been thinking about and maybe you can contribute to its very possible author. Maybe the Church has so enlightened the world that people have become stagnant to its necessity and live with a false understanding that all that is good (excluding the obvious) in our society will always exist. What we are experiencing is just another cycle ( to be optimistic) and will pass, since the “good” of our society cannot exist without Christ’s truth and Providence. The evil committed in the meantime is the result of humanity’s faults, which God justly allows.

5.) The plain and easy I don’t care belief.

I hope I helped and please as always critique my response.

fish90

 

[Musicadmirer]

Many Catholics are not Catholic because they do not want to suffer—suffer for the faith, and suffer in general. If we only truly valued the richness of our faith, the sacraments, the beauty of grace and reverence to God, we would fully embrace the suffering that comes with the joys.

Some Catholics treat their faith with passivity, and are careful to be ‘politically correct’ in their daily lives among the non-Catholic and non-Christian. We do not boldly proclaim our faith both vocally and in our dispositions as we should. We allow the influence of media and culture to dilute and confine our beliefs to a ‘church-only’ event.

It is a sad time.

 

[JReducation]

Hello Brother,

Orthodox Catholicism is simply very tough to follow especially in the world of today where evil has more means to expand into every fabric of our lives.

I find these to be very troubling facts contributing to Catholic decline.

1.) Temptation- Too easy to explain right.

2.) Hierarchical failure- This news report by lifesitenews.com shows the Catholic identity of Italy collapsing even though 94% of Italian children are enrolled in Catholic elementary schools. Now, I will admit there are always different reasons and not every reason is the same, but this failure would ultimately end with the hierarchy. Am I incorrect?
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10080901.html

3.) The “Niceness heresy”- I made this one up. Far too often the hard truths of Catholicism are forgotten for the intent of being nice on the part of the laity especially.
Some examples:

“I think I will skip Church, Jesus would not mind.”
“Why would Jesus care about women priests, everybody should deserve a chance?”
“My sins aren’t all that bad right?”
“The sin of … is not that evil right?”

Let’s not forget about contemporary liberal thought on egalitarian “rights.”

4.) I would also propose this new idea that I have been thinking about and maybe you can contribute to its very possible author. Maybe the Church has so enlightened the world that people have become stagnant to its necessity and live with a false understanding that all that is good (excluding the obvious) in our society will always exist. What we are experiencing is just another cycle ( to be optimistic) and will pass, since the “good” of our society cannot exist without Christ’s truth and Providence. The evil committed in the meantime is the result of humanity’s faults, which God justly allows.

5.) The plain and easy I don’t care belief.

I hope I helped and please as always critique my response.

fish90

LOL, first of all, I will not critque your response. That’s inappropriate for a Franciscan to do. We critque sin, not people and idea. Our Holy Father Francis taught us this by his own example. He went about the world teaching virtue, not criticizing failures. He was keenly aware that human beings were not stupid. They knew their failures. They simply did not acknowledge them or attempt to replace them with virtue. So he set about to teach the world how to live the Gospel.

He was a most interesting little man. He wanted to go to the missions and convert the non-believers. After that attempt failed he came back and asked Clare what to do. Stories tell us that she laughed histerically at the question. OK, pause here, Clare was a trip herself. Continuing, Clare told him that the Lord wanted him to convert the Catholics not the non-Catholics. God had sent the Dominicans into the world for that purpose.

What’s my point? My point is that each of us has a mission. If we make it our job to find that mission and fulfill it, the world will be converted. When we complicate our spiritual lives, as Francis tried to do, by taking on everything and everyone, we will fail. Clare seemed very clear on this.

I have often found people like her, Therese, Mother Teresa, Vincent de Paul, Elizabeth Ann Seton and other saints to be very inspiring. They focused on their little piece of the mission. In the end, it won them the crown of sainthood. We tend to be very distracted by every evil and everything around us. We attempt to live our spiritual lives as if the world depended on our wisdom and our efforts.

That’s why I encourage each person to follow the example of the saints. To be truly Catholic, we must be truly saints. Saints are very disciplined people and very focussed on their mission. They don’t worry about what others do or do not. They worry about what they should be doing. For some, that meant that they preached to the masses. For others it meant that they led very quiet lives. One of today’s great saints is Giana Mola. She did not go out to change the world. She set out to be a good wife, mother and physician. I think those three are enough to fill anyone’s plate. She did them to perfection. I recently had the honor of meeting one of her children. What they remember most about her was her joy doing what she did, not conquering the world.

I also met the niece of one of our own Franciscan saints, St. Maximilian Kolbe. I was speaking to her about her uncle. She mentioned that Brother Max was so focused on his mission to bring the message of Mary to the world, that he did not notice the Nazis until they were at his front door. To him, it was the most natural thing to focus on his magazine, his writings on Marian theology and his obligations to his Franciscan community. He knew that he could not take on more than this. He was the superior of the largest Franciscan house in history, over 300 brothers. Naziism grew up around him and he did not realize it or did not give any indication that he realized it. I asked his niece if she ever wondered why he was so oblivious. She said that her father had mentione that Brother Max was completly devoted to one thing, being a saint. This meant the avoidance of sin, the promotion of love for Mary and living the Franciscan rule.

It is this simplicity that we must recover in our spiritual lives. Our times are no harder and no more challenging than the Dark Ages of Francis or the Nazi era of Maximilian or the poverty and war torn era of India and Mother Teresa. Certainly, we have nothing over the times of the Apostles and the Church Fathers.

But all of them had something on us. They were focussed on what THEY had to do, not everyone else.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Edmundus1581]

Wouldn’t your friend’s observation tend to prove that Catholic church is divinely inspired and sustained? I assent to her because I believe that, not because I follow the opinion of many, or even most, fellow Catholics.

(and, btw, as a piece of writing, your post was clear, brief, entertaining, and built a forceful argument - keep working on that book!)

 

[Student09]

If they don’t trust what their leaders say about the normal things of life, why do they believe the nonsense about bread becoming Jesus or why do they believe that the interpretation that priests and theologians give to the bible are correct?”

I am curious how many people your friend spoke to who believed the Church’s doctrine of transubstantiation and interpretation of the Bible but dissented on birth control, abortion, etc. If they are dissenting on these other issues then obviously they do not accept the Church’s interpretation of the Bible. And personally, the Catholics I have spoken to who dissent on some Church teachings do not believe in transubstantiation. They will receive the Eucharist, but to them it is just a symbol. I know one woman who goes to Mass every Sunday and receives, but didn’t even learn what the Church teaches about the Eucharist until she sat in on her daughter’s Confirmation class, and when she did learn, she said she didn’t believe it. However, I think she was struggling with the idea. It was new to her. This is a woman in her late forties and lifelong Catholic - the fact that she had never heard this before indicates a (serious) lack of good catechisis.

Catholics are not a homogeneous group, every Catholic is an individual. We can’t make a blanket statement about all Catholics. I think there are flaws in your friend’s argument.

That said, it is obviously the case that the sins of members of the Church are a source of scandal for those outside it - and for those within as well. The example of faithful Catholics can counteract this, however; I was fortunate to know a Catholic who was very devout, very respectful of the hierarchy of the Church, absolutely assented to all the teachings (he was a convert, by the way). His example and his prayers really helped me in coming into the Church. Maybe because of this, I don’t think it is all gloom and doom. But we each must try to be that person who draws others - through our respect, charity and faithfulness - rather than the one who repels. It is not easy.

 

[JReducation]

I am curious how many people your friend spoke to who believed the Church’s doctrine of transubstantiation and interpretation of the Bible but dissented on birth control, abortion, etc.

This is don’t know, but it does not matter. What matters is what you said below.

The example of faithful Catholics can counteract this, however; I was fortunate to know a Catholic who was very devout, very respectful of the hierarchy of the Church, absolutely assented to all the teachings (he was a convert, by the way). His example and his prayers really helped me in coming into the Church. Maybe because of this, I don’t think it is all gloom and doom. But we each must try to be that person who draws others - through our respect, charity and faithfulness - rather than the one who repels. It is not easy.

Catholics must be very careful of the image of the Church that we protray to those who are looking at us. We must protray great holiness, not just on the surface, but in reality.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[buffalo]

Catholic believe all that the Catholic Church teaches even though they are often incapable of fully living the proposition. These would be called practicing Catholics.

 

[JReducation]

Catholic believe all that the Catholic Church teaches even though they are often incapable of fully living the proposition. These would be called practicing Catholics.

I believe you have hit the nail on the head. We should believe what the Church teaches and we should take lessons on holiness from our saints. But it seems more and more that we’re drifting away from this and more into selecting what we want to accept. This is dangerous to the soul.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Lief_Erikson]

JReducation, do you know if the man you spoke to ended up converting?

I also wonder about this:

I’m remember the new Australian saint, whose name escapes me right now. She was excommunicated by the local bishop and she continued to speak of him with great reverence and to treat him with great respect. I read a little about that fateful day. She cried herself to sleep, but did not reproach him. Eventually, the bishop lifted the excommunication and approved her work.

Do you think you could find out who this saint is? I would like to learn more about her.

If you can’t, or it would be difficult, don’t worry about it. There are lots of other saints I can learn from. I’m just curious .

 

[JReducation]

JReducation, do you know if the man you spoke to ended up converting?

Actually yes. He was baptized this past Easter.

I also wonder about this:

Do you think you could find out who this saint is? I would like to learn more about her.

If you can’t, or it would be difficult, don’t worry about it. There are lots of other saints I can learn from. I’m just curious .

I had an old moment. My age is showing. Her name is Mother Mary McKillop. You can read about her here.

perthnow.com.au/news/australias-first-saint-a-new-era-for-nations-catholics/story-e6frg12c-1225832097722

fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[DOShea]

I liked your article too. One thing, though, is that it presumes what you have to follow is clear. You may have this clarity in your order, with rules written down and a process where ambiguous or new situations can be resolved and ONE set of marching orders emerges. The whole Church isn’t always like that, and I’d be interested to hear your take on resolving conflicting teaching.

I believe you have hit the nail on the head. We should believe what the Church teaches and we should take lessons on holiness from our saints. But it seems more and more that we’re drifting away from this and more into selecting what we want to accept. This is dangerous to the soul.

Well there is the small matter of dissenting voices within the Church who deliver a completely different take on things. Some of them have teaching authority. When you have two people, each with legitimate authority, telling you something different, each claiming to be in accord with the Holy Father, it isn’t always clear which avenue to take. Following either one automatically puts you in opposition to the other. All too often this “dissent” is laid at the feet of the laity who must make a choice, since those who are “the Church” to them aren’t speaking with a single voice. Even the dimmest light of a Catholic knows there is only one God and therefore only one Truth. So… which one is it? Hmm.

Many times these situations are the source of friction when those laity, knowing there can’t be two different “rights,” push to have their religious authorities address these situations in order to clarify the questions. This is not challenge to authority, but seeking authority out in order to get to the truth of the matters at hand. When those issues go ignored, nothing gets resolved and the problem only gets larger. In some cases, the laity has been blamed for challenging authority when all they are doing is trying to get a straight answer.

All the obedience in the world does you no good if you can’t figure out what or who to obey. Unless, of course, you think we can serve two masters.

 

[JReducation]

I liked your article too. One thing, though, is that it presumes what you have to follow is clear. You may have this clarity in your order, with rules written down and a process where ambiguous or new situations can be resolved and ONE set of marching orders emerges. The whole Church isn’t always like that, and I’d be interested to hear your take on resolving conflicting teaching.

I get this question a lot when people come for spiritual direction. I always give them the advice of St. Francis. Go with the person to whom you’re accountable. That’s always your immediate superior. In the case of the laity, that would be the diocesan bishop. Never go with something that you know is a sin. That’s common sense.

As the logic goes, if the peson directly above you is making a mistake (not sin, just a prudential mistake), God is still pleased by your effort to obey. God is never pleased by arrogance. Disobeying something that is sinful is not arrogance. That’s justifiable.

There are times when people will ask what to do when the Vatican says to do X and the bishop says to do Y. I see how that creates a conflict. I always say that one should do two things.

1. Politely ask for clarification. The key word here is to be polite. You can write or ask for an appointment with the local bishop or chancelor.
2. Go with the bishop, unless he’s telling you to sin.
3. Go with the highest authority if there is a real breach of law and you know that there is a breach.

One may ask, “Shouldn’t I go with the pope?” The answer is affirmative. However, and here is where things get complicated, sometimes the bishop has an inside understanding of why something that the pope may have said or commented on is not legally binding. This does not mean that the pope is wrong. It simply means that there are comments that he makes and preferences that he has that are not binding on the bishops, because he has not expressed them in such a way as to bind them. A good example is our Holy Father’s preference for Communion on the tongue while kneeling. He has never bound the bishops to this practice. It is his preference. Even in his diocese, COTT and CITH are both used. Some people say that the bishops are disobedient, because the pope wants this and they don’t impose it. The pope did not say that to the bishops. That’s just one example of a number of things that the Vatican says or does, but does not bind under any kind of penalty. In such a case, since we do not know, it is legitimate to go with the local bishop. We simpy do not always know what was meant as a command or was a commentary. They often sound similar, but are not meant to be such.

Well there is the small matter of dissenting voices within the Church who deliver a completely different take on things. Some of them have teaching authority. When you have two people, each with legitimate authority, telling you something different, each claiming to be in accord with the Holy Father, it isn’t always clear which avenue to take.

That does happen. I always go with my immediate superior. God will not hold it against me that two people are hearing two different things. There are times when I know that I have a choice in the matter. Then I go with the one that sounds closest to what I understood the Holy Father to say.

Many times these situations are the source of friction when those laity, knowing there can’t be two different “rights,” push to have their religious authorities address these situations in order to clarify the questions. This is not challenge to authority, but seeking authority out in order to get to the truth of the matters at hand. When those issues go ignored, nothing gets resolved and the problem only gets larger. In some cases, the laity has been blamed for challenging authority when all they are doing is trying to get a straight answer.

There is nothing wrong with asking a question. It’s all in how the question is asked and when. I believe that the manner and the time are important.

All the obedience in the world does you no good if you can’t figure out what or who to obey. Unless, of course, you think we can serve two masters.

If you’re sure that the higher authority wants something different, go with that. If you’re not sure go with the authority at hand. Like I said, there are times when something may sound like an order, but was not meant to be.

Unless I know that something is really contrary to Church law or doctrine, I always give the immediate authority the benefit of the doubt. In the end, I’m not the person responsible for clarifying. I’m trying to do the best I can with the little knowledge that I have. God knows our hearts and our effort to please him.

This is what we can learn from the saints. They too got confusing messages. They did not live in an ideal world and an ideal Church. They kept it very simple. They cooperated with the parish, their bishop, the communities in which they lives (religious or secular) to the best of their abilities, based on what they knew. They tried very hard not to get upset because this person said A and that person said B. They worked within the numbers.

I always remember Elizabeth Ann Seton. AI believe that Bishop Caroll made a mistake sending her to Emmitsburg before the house was ready. He had no intention to do her harm and maybe he did not know. I have not idea. But I learn from her. She obeyed him. She lost a child as a result of a very harsh situation, later another child and another. But she did not stop obeying him or loving him. She had placed her entire life in the hands of Providence. As long as the bishop did not ask her to go steal or kill, she did what he told her. These great sacrifices and acts of faith made her a remarkable mystic and later a saint.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Lief_Erikson]

JR, I think DOShea was referring to situations where there are conflicts over what is a sin and what is not. For instance, a bishop might be relativistic or very lax on morals in his teaching. We have some liberal bishops, and sometimes they say things that are very different from what the Vatican says. And when they do, they pass it off as official Church teaching and say that conservative Catholics, for instance, Catholics who believe homosexuality is a sin and abortion is wrong, are not understanding the Vatican or official Church teaching correctly.

 

[JReducation]

JR, I think DOShea was referring to situations where there are conflicts over what is a sin and what is not. For instance, a bishop might be relativistic or very lax on morals in his teaching. We have some liberal bishops, and sometimes they say things that are very different from what the Vatican says. And when they do, they pass it off as official Church teaching and say that conservative Catholics, for instance, Catholics who believe homosexuality is a sin and abortion is wrong, are not understanding the Vatican or official Church teaching correctly.

Ahhhhhhhhh, now I understand this differently. I tought we were talking about disiciplines, such as COTT vs CITH and so forth.

This is a very different situation. But the rule principle of going back to the saints is still helpful. What do we learn from our saints? What do they do that inspire us? They too lived with such conflicts. These are not new to our generation, though we often feel that way.

The goal in the Christian life is to be a saint. It is not to be right. St. Francis always taught this and if we take the example of his life, we see how the Church venerates him as the “perfect Christian” or the “Mirror of Perfection”.

In his “little book” sin was sin and virtue was virtue, regardless of who said what. He always went with what was virtue. But we can learn from him how to circumnavigate around these troublesome issues, such as a bishop who is not orthodox. I’ll just point out a few things that he did which have always inspired me.

He prayed for guidance, not only for him, but for those who were in sin.

He obeyed in all things that were not sin, even if they wee foolish or could be done better. He taught us that we are not to take ourselves seriously. Each of us is nothing and each of us should consider ourselves to be no one. Regardless of whether the bishop, pope, priest or other person was a great sinner, he is still superior to us. Therefore, we hold him in high esteem. We speak to him and about him with reverence and love. We apply to him for guidance, then take what is good and quietly lay aside what is sin.

He always reminded people that no matter how great the sin of the cleric, each of us is capable of worse sins.

He always reminded people that without the bishop, there was no Church. To him, this was no small thing. The existence of the Church depends on the existence of the bishop, not on the bishop’s holiness. Therefore, we protect the role of the bishop and we venerate the office of the bishop, by never saying anything against a bishop where it can do harm to the Church and the faith of the people in the Apostolic Succession. Francis teaching on this matter was so powerful, that when Nicholas IV became pope, he made this law and it still stands. Nicholas was a Franciscan Brother. He was deeply convinced of the wisdom of Francis regarding this matter. His teaching is still found in Church law. The clergy and religious are to be treated with reverence at all time, regardless of their failures.

There is a wonderful story about St. Teresa of Avila. She met a priest who was living with a woman. He had become the joke of the town. Teresa chose him as her confessor. The priest felt justifiable in his relationship. His argument was that he was not a consecrated man. He was a diocesan priest. He had a bone to pick with celibacy for non consecrated priests.

Teresa was encouraged not to go to confession to him. Her response was very simple. “I go to confession to him to get absolution for my sins, not his. When he sins, he is a man, when he preaches and absolves, he is Christ.” After many months of this relationship, the priest was inspired by her faith in priests. He commented to her that she did not know anything about him, because she was new in town.

Teresa informed him that she knew enough, but his sins were not her business. This was between he and God. He told her that his bishop had told him that he was leading souls away from Christ. Teresa responded, “I disagree. You’re showing souls the path to hell, but you’re not leading them. Everyone walks the path by his own choice.”

When the priest asked her what to do, she became very angry and started to shout at him. “Why are you asking me what you need to do for your salvation? Ask someone above you, not someone beneath you. Use common sense.” She left very quickly.

Later, the priest would approach her again and ask her to walk the journey of conversion with him. He needed her support. She responded, “None of us walks the journey with another. Each of us walks alone. However, none of us is alone, because we all walk the same journey. I can’t walk with you. You’ll have to go at it alone, because I must take care of my own soul, which needs my full atttention, but I’ll pray for you. Now, please give me your blessing . . . afterall, you’re still a priest.”

If we look at the way that the saints handled these situations we can learn a great deal. They focussed on what was immediately in front of them, not on big pictures. Someone like Mother Teresa, who was very outspoken on abortion, was very happy when she saved a child from abortion. She was very energetic when she could speak out against abortion. But she had a great deal of discipline in her life. When she had a case in front of her, she focussed on that, not on what bishop or theologian or group said what. At that moment, none of what they said mattered. There was a mother and child before her. She knew the moral law. What was important was that she applied it when the opportunity presented itself. She also taught it, when the opportunity presented itself.

Giana Mola was another who grappled with this quesion. She too decided that her salvation depended on three things: being a holy wife, a holy mother and a holy physician.

 

[JReducation]

It is important to know the truth and to act accordingly. But the greatness of the spiritual life is achieved through discipline and focus. Always respond to what comes up with the joy and detachment of the saints. Always revere your bishop, because he’s an Apostle, not because he’s a saint. If he’s a saint, throw that in too.

We are losing that sense of awe. There was a time when we looked to the saints to learn how to face the daily challenges of the spiritual life. We looked at them in awe. We wanted to be like them. Today, we tend to think too much and rely too much on our conclusions.

If you want to know what to do with heterodox bishops, priests and religious, as the saints what they did. You’ll be surprised at how simple it is. That’s why I ask the question about Catholics being Catholics. The saints were a great part of our lives. Today, we’re acting like Protestants. We sit around thinking and thinking and thinking. But we don’t reflect on them.

This whole idea that we have to lead our leaders is a very Protestant idea. That was not the case in the history of the Church and her saints. Saints certainly cooperated very closely with Church leaders. Some even got into debates with them and they paid the price for it. Some Church leaders were mean. But the difference between them and many of us is that the saints took the meaness, because they were very aware that they were nothing compared to others.

Bl. Mary McKillop was unfairly excommunicated. We know this now. At the time, he cried herself to sleep and begged God to let her see what she had done wrong. Notice her attitude. She did not find fault in the bishop. She looked for fault in herself. God would eventually show her that she had done nothing wrong, by moving the bishop to recant. Her humble prayer was answered.

Francis was threatened by his bishop. The Bishop of Assisi told him that his insistance on living the Gospel literally looked like heresy. Francis was horrified. He did not call the bishop a fool. Instead, he asked the bishop what to do. The bishop told him that only the pope could protect him from heresy. So Francis set off for Rome. That’s how our order was founded. The bishop was wrong; but Francis later admitted that he chose not to judge the bishop. Instead he chose to find out by going higher. He went to the pope.

I have been in such situations. My superiior may say something that I believe is a sin. If I’m not sure, then I have a moral duty to ask for clarification. If the clarification that is given is consistent with the teachings of the Church, then I am bound to comply. I don’t have to agree. I just have to submit. Why? Because I am nothing compared to my superior. I must always be like garbage at the end of the broom.

If the answer is contrary to the faith of the Church, then I have the right to decline. However, I do not have the right to disrespect him or disobey in any other matter. He is wrong on this one point. His authority does not go away, because he is morally wrong. The same applies to bishops. They retain the right to except reverence, respect and obedience from all of us, just not compliance with sin.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Suslar]

Dear Br. JR,

I’ve read posts you’ve written on various topics before and I think it would be a fabulous idea for you to write the book! I do hope the time when your superior grants permission is fast approaching. Part of my hope is because so much of what is currently available on the subject of “Why I’m Catholic” makes it seem like Catholicism is a multiple choice proposition. There are too many dissident authors who are speaking as voices of authority that push radical agendas in the name of “Wouldn’t Jesus like it if we all hold hands and sing kumbaya?”

I don’t know that people consciously intend to disagree with and be violent towards tenants of our faith and those who teach Truth. I think the root of the problem is much deeper – culturally, as Americans, I think we all feel we are entitled to the “right” to question & reject anything & everything and ridicule those whose points of view differ, and secondly, there is still the major issue with entire generations of Catholics who were improperly catechized or not catechized at all. It is so easy for dissidents to sway large crowds when people who have minimal knowledge of the faith blindly follow dazzling, persuasive speakers and don’t know enough to know what they were just told is not in line with Rome. I really think it comes down to lack of education. People don’t know. They don’t know about the miracle that occurs every day at Mass. They don’t know about our Traditions (with a capital T) and what they must believe to consider ourselves truly Catholic. They don’t know.

I can liken it to a news article I saw recently about young men wearing hats. One 20-something was offended when a restaurant manager asked him to remove his hat inside the building. The young man became violent over his “right” to wear his hat and define his individual style and took a slug at the manager. The police were called and it was a mess. My first reaction was, “Didn’t that young man have a momma?” Because certainly a momma would have taught her son hat etiquette, right? Unless, of course, his momma hadn’t been taught. People cannot know what they don’t know. It’s common in parishes to hear things like “Catholic education begins in the home.” How can it when the vast majority of American Catholics don’t know the faith well enough to pass it on? We need to look to our parishes for guidance but many parishes are trying so hard to be politically correct and welcome everyone that there are no standards of right & wrong and no talk about the things we need to know when the salvation of souls is at stake. So we look to Catholic schools and find people calling themselves Catholic who promote activities and viewpoints not in accord with our Faith. What are we to do to learn more so we can be truly Catholic? The Catholic laity needs a champion and a teacher of Truth.

Br. JR, as I’ve said, I’ve read your posts on here. I don’t think you frighten people away. Yes, you may challenge, but you are always addressing the issue, not the person. That’s why I think you would be so successful in your endeavors to write this book. We need it now more than ever.

Please know you are in my prayers and I’d love to see an advance copy once you get permission!