Posted on 10/18/2012 9:33:13 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
If asked to diagnose the present situation of Roman Catholics in the United States, the first word that comes to mind is: their abysmal ignorance of fundamental Catholic dogmas, such as the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Redemptive value of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross, the Holy Mass and the real presence of Christ is in the Eucharist. One is bound to be deeply grieved by young people’s ignorance. I have kept my high school text book entitled “Christian Religion,” a 439 page book (without the footnotes) fairly large format, relatively small print. At the age of sixteen, I knew the content of this work, divided in three parts; doctrine, moral teaching, and sacraments.
Not only had my father convinced me that to know one’s faith was the most important thing in life, but I was convinced of its truth: this doctrine truly came from above, and shed light on the meaning of our fragile human existence. The most important thing was to adore, love and serve God in this life, to die in the state of grace, and then enjoy the beatific vision forever and ever. I believed the content of the Credo, and was aware of all the key heresies that have plagued the Church from the beginning – heresies that keep reappearing in the history of the Church, usually disguised under slightly different formulations.
Of course, to know one’s faith did not guarantee living it. Inevitably one was bound to realize that daily life was a struggle, and that constant grace (given through the sacraments) was necessary to take the small steps necessary to assent the mountain the Lord.
Constant defeats did not justify discouragement for Christ said: “ … without me you can do nothing” (Jn. 15:5) and “Come to me all those that are burdened and I will help you.” (Mt. 11:28) His succor was constantly needed. How uplifting was the prayer of St. Augustine: “Da quod jubes et jube quod vis.” “Give me what you command, and then command that you will.”
It clearly means, I am much too weak to fulfill your commandments, but give me your grace, your divine help and then I shall be able to “scale mountains.” St. Therese of Lisieux wrote these admirable words; “I have never been able to do anything alone.”
After Vatican II, Catholic schools were bombarded with “new catechisms” that were supposed to upgrade the “old” Baltimore Catechism which has been the spiritual food of Catholic children for years. Apparently its content was no longer satisfactory for “modern youth.” The “climate” of the time was “renewal.” It became a “magic” word; everything had to be changed to be in accord with the Zeitgeist.
In the frame work of this modest article, it is not possible to go into details; it should suffice to make a couple of revealing remarks.
One thing that was striking in the “new” teaching was the omission of many traditional doctrines of the Church. Not to even mention some key truths of the faith inevitably deprived it of some of its pillars, and rendered the whole “building” shaky. All revealed truths are like rings in a golden chain…any break in it is a threat to the whole. Omission is dangerously subtle, because not to mention a doctrine does not necessary imply that its truth is denied. Therefore, the authors of new catechisms could not – prima facie –
be accused of propagating heresies, or defending false doctrines. But silence is an insidious way of misleading the reader.
Another striking characteristic of the “new catechisms” is the systematic watering down (or downright elimination) of the supernatural. Christianity stands or falls according to whether or not the supernatural is not only acknowledged but given pride of place in both doctrine and in daily life.
A quote taken from the Benziger Catechism is most revealing. Referring to the episode of Jesus’ visit in Bethany in which St. Luke tells us that Martha was busy preparing the meal while Mary sat at Jesus’ feet drinking His words, at one point Martha objected to her doing the whole work alone. Mary should indeed help her.
To which, Jesus responded with the sublime words: “Martha, Martha, you are concerned about many things. One thing alone is necessary; Mary has chosen the better part, and it will not be taken away from her.” (Lk. 10:41-42) The divine message is clear: Contemplation is above action – adoration is above “social work.” While sleeping, the Holy Virgin still adored God because her life was totally and radically rooted in Him. The greatest saints have learned never to stop contemplating while acting.
The words just quoted coming from the mouth of the Savior are supernatural nuggets that have been the spiritual food of the saints – the holy spiritual treasure handed us from Christ, to His apostles, to the Holy Church. The supernatural not only transcends nature, but heals it from the wound inflicted upon it by original sin. The mystery of mystery: the Incarnation testifies to God’s love for his rebellious creatures that, having severed the bond uniting them to their Creator became “sick unto death.” They could not by their own power, heal the disease. They needed a Savior. The “madness” of divine love chose to send us a Savior: Christ, the Second person of the Holy Divinity. As prophesized by Isaiah 7:14, “Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be Emmanuel (God among us).” This Savior will be a man of sorrow, despised, rejected by his own people. (Is. 53:3) Indeed, Kierkegaard has a point when he refers to God’s saving action in sacrificing His only Son, as “madness.” (“… such a doctrine could only occur to a god who has lost his wits – so must a man judge who has kept his wits.” (Sickness unto death.) It ended at Calvary; the most abominable tragedy in the history of mankind.
The way St. Luke’s text mentioned above is now presented to “modern” Catholic children should make the Angels cry. “Jesus said: “Martha, do not worry too much about dinner; just do the best you can.”
Such caricature is a form of “treason.” Not wishing to pass judgment on the unfortunate person (I fear it was a nun) who wrote these words, we must sadly acknowledge that she was “betraying” Christ’s message, a female Judas.
Whereas the Savior reminds Martha that man’s greatest and holy task is to love and serve God, is it now reduced to the common sense word that every child is told when for the first time, he clumsily holds a pen, and tries to write his name. He is “warned” that the result might not be perfect, but all that is asked of him is “do his best.”
Revelation is certainly not needed for this flat footed “wisdom” which is sheer blasphemy when put in the mouth of the God-man – the Savior of the world. May God have mercy on her: hopefully “she did not know what she was doing,” namely shutting the door to the supernatural, and “canonize” mediocrity and pettiness?
Indeed, we did not need the Self Sacrifice of a God on Calvary to teach us “to do our best.” If the Angels cried, the evil ones must have had a diabolical laughter at the abysmal human stupidity.
This is bad enough, but what is still more tragic is that we would expect the local bishop to prohibit this catechism from being used in Catholic schools and to alert all his brother bishops of the fearful danger of this attack on the supernatural. Not only should the imprimatur be denied, but words and pen should be used to condemn this apparent “innocent betrayal.” The tragedy is increased because it sounds so “harmless,” so innocuous, so common sense.
We touch upon another facet of the terrible danger threatening us: religious and spiritual “insensitivity.” People are no longer shocked by such pronouncements. “I do not see anything wrong with it.” Once the sense for the supernatural has been sapped, the door is open to religious indifference. When a priest in his Sunday Homily refers to God as “the good guy upstairs,” people do not protest. “He means well,” “Be charitable,” “He is a good, friendly man.” But the Bible tells us that Angels prostrate themselves in front of their Creator, while uttering the words: Holy, Holy, Holy.
When another pastor (that was in Europe) says in his Homily that …“he is getting sick and tired of all these mothers who come to him sobbing because their son has disappeared for several days and then was found in a nightclub, I remind them that Jesus disappeared for three days and then was found in the Temple. He adds, “He too was a nasty brat, but Mary did not make such a fuss.” Any comment is unnecessary, but it makes us realize of the deadly gravity of the crisis that our beloved Church is going through. That such a man was ordained a priest of the Catholic Church makes one wonders what happens in seminaries.
The silence of many Bishops was deafening. I wish they would daily meditate on the words of Ezekiel 3:17-18: “I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel.” If a watchman does not warn the wicked, “... his blood I will require at your hand ...”
To be in a position of authority is an honor, but one that requires moral courage and even heroism. Alas, if the three cherished apostles of Christ, Peter, James and John fell asleep in Gethsemane, we should not be overly surprised that their successors follow in their footsteps. Let us not forget however, that all the apostles after receiving the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, became, “new men and joyfully shed their blood for Christ.” St. John had his own special type of martyrdom.
But the evil fruits that sprang up in the wake of the Council (for the “enemy” sowed tars when the watchmen became somnolent) did not end there. Always again, under various forms, the same war on the supernatural was – and is – making many victims.
Another text expresses the same betrayal. One again the supernatural is systematically eliminated. The following text proves it: Grammar school children are told that George Washington, Daniel Boone, Babe Ruth are praised for their remarkable accomplishments – whether as general, scout or baseball player. Then Christ is mentioned among them and we are informed that he became famous, “because he loved people so much.”
Once again, this is so scandalous that one has to turn to prayer to recover one’s breath. How is it possible that a “so called” Catholic (whether priest, nun or layperson) should place on the same level military or sportive performances with the God-man who came down from Heaven to save us by dying on the Cross? How does the Savior differ from a philanthropist? Inevitably the abyss separating the supernatural from the natural is once again flatly denied.
May God have mercy on those who – while pretending to give children the holy food of Catholic doctrine – give them poisonous secular food, distort their vision, and the beautiful innate sense of God given to the little ones. Indeed, “... unless you become like one of these little children …” Would it not be better for these writers to have a millstone put around their neck?
Alas, the picture is not brighter when it comes of “biblical scholarship.” That there is a valid and worthwhile Biblical scholarship has been acknowledged by Benedict XVI, but as the Devil never sleeps, there is also one which in the name of “research.” Eliminates the supernatural, and forgets – to quote Kierkegaard – that the Bible (to be properly understood) should be read on one’s knees.
We are now referring to the Dutch catechism the poison of which is much more difficult to detect because it is couched in “scholarly” language, and has therefore a show of respectability. We are trained to be “awed” when hearing the words’ “scholarly” or “Biblical research.” That several Dutch bishops were infected by secularism and modernism cannot, alas, be denied. We only need refer to their purposeful vagueness on the key Christian issue of the divinity of Christ. Some of them tell us that scholarship has not yet “entirely decided” whether or not Christ had an earthly father! The perpetual virginity of Mary might have been “figurative.” Do we need say more?
Let me repeat; from the very beginning, the Evil one has spread lies and heresies. Today, they are presented as “better ways” of communicating the faith that is more likely to appeal to “modern ears.” In other words, instead of adapting our “mentality’ to the Holy teaching of the Church, we are now taught that this divine message should be adapted to the ever changing vagaries of “modern man.” (Forgetting that what is “modern” today is “old fashioned” tomorrow). How right Chesterton was when he reminded us that mysteries being mysteries have always needed an act of faith – that is, an act of intellectual humility that some Biblical scholars seem allergic to. In his Epistle to the Thessalonians, St. Paul urges us to “pray constantly.” (Thess. 5:17) To obey this loving command is today, more urgent than ever. For we seem to have entered into apocalyptic time, a time of such confusion as to seduce even the elect, as St. Luke tells us.
However, the gravity of the present situation should not make us forget for a single moment Christ’s promise: “the gates of hell shall not prevail.” Indeed, final victory is certain, but in the mean time, we are called upon to “be sober and watch” as St. Peter urges us in his First Epistle. (1Peter 5:8) Woe to those who fall asleep when the Bridegroom comes.
....The silence of many Bishops was deafening. I wish they would daily meditate on the words of Ezekiel 3:17-18: “I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel.” If a watchman does not warn the wicked, “... his blood I will require at your hand ...”
Amen to Dr. von Hildebrand. Amen to Ezekiel.
Good Article, Alex
I love Alice Von Hildebrand and have been invited to events where she has spoken , but it unfortunately did not fit with my schedule at the time
Perhaps you might remember all the complaints that were made against Dr John Rao on FR- Dr Rao was the Director of Alice Von Hildebrand’s deceased husband Dietrich Von Hildebrand Institute.Dietrich and Alice Von Hildebrand along with Dr Rao understood the the depths of the enlightenment and the influence it had on the reformation along with the trouble that lay ahead for a nation(the US) with these enlightenment influences.
It’s false idea of freedom is being played out before our very eyes today with this “anything goes society” because the education system has been highjacked by secularism for so many years
We are now referring to the Dutch catechism the poison of which is much more difficult to detect because it is couched in “scholarly” language, and has therefore a show of respectability. We are trained to be “awed” when hearing the words’ “scholarly” or “Biblical research.” That several Dutch bishops were infected by secularism and modernism cannot, alas, be denied. We only need refer to their purposeful vagueness on the key Christian issue of the divinity of Christ. Some of them tell us that scholarship has not yet “entirely decided” whether or not Christ had an earthly father! The perpetual virginity of Mary might have been “figurative.” Do we need say more?
It is a delicious irony that the higher criticism which the ancient liturgical churches have adopted as a way of distinguishing themselves from Fundamentalist Protestants was actually invented by liberal Protestants (whom the ancient churches, in their ecumania, prefer not to criticize). I can assure the reader from personal experience that on any Catholic/Orthodox/what-have-you forum any reticence of the most modernistic, anti-supernatural garbage is met with "what trailer park do you live in?" The "two creation accounts" are now supposed to be basic Catholic/Orthodox doctrine, perhaps taught by the Cappadocian fathers. Even FReeper Catholics have sneered at the idea of a "G-d-breathed Bible" though this is exactly what the word "inspired" (a Latin word) means. In Armenian, the Bible is called Azvadzazhunch, which means "G-d's breath." But never mind that. We don't want to be like Those Awful People who are such an embarrassment to religion everywhere.
And I hope I am making it clear that this is not merely a problem with the Catholic Church. The ancient so-called "lesser eastern churches" (Non-Chalcaedonian and Nestorian) which are supposedly so insulated, so ancient, and so "quaint," are ecumaniacs whose religion has reduced to ethnic identity. Did you know that the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church is one of the founders of the World Council of Churches? Hmm?
The liturgies of the ancient churches are nothing but pantomimes which are recited without any sincerity. "Accept this sacrifice as you did that of your servant Abel?" Ha! No one outside of a "trailer park" believes Abel ever existed. And don't get me started on the "history" recited at the Xmas mass which gives the history of the world from a creation which the celebrant reciting it regards as primitive mythology.
The lesser ethnic churches are among the most liberal churches on earth because their identity has been reduced to ethnicity (Armenian/Assyrian/Coptic/whatever). Watch an e@ster service from one of these ancient churches and see if the celebrant preaches anything other than mush which might be historical or might simply symbolize the flowers that bloom in the spring (tra-la).
As chrstians from exotic "non-western" cultures these churches have moral capital that white Protestants and Catholics don't have, yet they are totally missing in the "culture wars." And how many of them routinely support liberal Democrat politicians who laud their "beautiful heritage" while they spit in the face of less exotic American Xians?
To tell you the truth, I sometimes wonder now if these churches ever actually believed anything at any time (maybe they just used to consider their allegories worth fighting for). For some reason it seems only rural Southern Anglo Fundamentalist Protestants actually believe anything, and for this their "dear brothers and sisters" despise them.
Although I am no longer a chrstian, I still hold my beliefs with the same simplicity and vehemency that I always did . . . something that seems absolutely missing in every other group. Maybe it's a genetic thing? Maybe we're the only people that ever actually believed anything? Maybe the others laugh at us because we take "the joke" seriously?
For whatever reason, it certainly seems that the more ritualized a church is, the less literally it believes anything.
Dear Friend,
Hopefully,you also realize that the same holds trues for Jewish Religions as well,yours included.
The enemy of love(evil) seeks to destroy supernatural belief in favor of the common sense of man's intellectualism capabilities.
For whatever reason, it certainly seems that the more ritualized a church is, the less literally it believes anything.
Dear Friend,
Hopefully,you also realize that the same holds trues for Jewish Religions as well,yours included.
First of all, the Jewish "ritual" is nothing like that of the churches. There is very little, if any, pageantry in it. It consists entirely of men standing around reciting a prescribed order of prayers. The reason for this is that the true Jewish ritual (the `Avodat HaQodesh) was performed in the Holy Temple and can be performed nowhere else. For almost two thousand years the enactment of this ritual has been impossible. Whether this lack of ritual has something to do with the more fundamentalistic interpretations of some Orthodox Jews I don't know, but it is an interesting theory.
The enemy of love(evil) seeks to destroy supernatural belief in favor of the common sense of man's intellectualism capabilities.
Unfortunately, this has already happened in the churches. The acceptance of materialistic cosmogony and Biblical de-"mythologization" reduces the remaining miracles that chrstians believe in to nonsense. As a Catholic you are aware that to reject even one dogma, even if subscribing to all the others, renders one void of the virtue of "divine and Catholic faith." I suggest that the rejection of the first eleven chapters of Genesis renders the continued acceptance of such doctrines as the virgin birth as an indefensible inconsistency.
Yes, "scientifically" the first eleven chapters of Genesis "could not possibly have happened." But scientifically the virgin birth could not have happened. Neither could the resurrection, the multiplication of loaves and fishes, walking on water, transubstantiation, etc. Each and every one of these things is scientifically impossible. If you doubt this ask any scientist you may know.
What then is the excuse for rejecting the first eleven chapters of Genesis? Because they are "scientifically impossible?" Coming from one who believes in the above enumerated impossibilities that excuse is a joke. Because of what "we now know?" We also "now know" that women can't give birth without having first been impregnated in some fashion. How in the world can a person deny the events of the first eleven chapters of Genesis in the name of "science" and "new knowledge" while simultaneously piously declaiming that the virgin birth "was a miracle?"
There is only one reason for rejecting the early chapters of Genesis while accepting everything else: sociology. Genesis 1-11 is the purview of "inbred morons in trailer parks." There is simply no other reason whatsoever to reject them while piously subscribing to every other scientific impossibility claimed by religion.
Also, those atheist scientists who stand shoulder to shoulder with their chrstian fellows in denouncing creationism while refusing to rebuke their colleagues for such nonsense as belief in a "virgin birth" are inconsistent sell-outs who obviously have not one shred of integrity. Else they would not carefully limit their scorn and their scientism to Genesis 1-11, which is what they do.
In conclusion, if you truly believe that discrediting superrational realities in the name of the human intellect is the work of "the evil one," then how can you yourself subscribe to this very thing when you reject the history and chronologies of the first eleven chapters of Genesis? How can your "infallible, indefectible" Church do it?
The Catholic Church's treatment of the Bible shows that the "indefectible Church" has indeed defected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.