• Because a church is a sacred, consecrated space. Churches are permanently consecrated. The one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church has always taught this, continues to teach this, and it has been a major point of difference and contention between protestants and Catholics. While mass can be held anywhere, ideally it should not be held just anywhere. That is why Catholics have churches. God deserves reverence and this is why a beautiful and lovingly created church is best suited to His worship in the highest form of prayer, the holy sacrifice of the mass.*

• Because we love our little community. For goodness sakes, that is reason enough! If "the Church is the people," as is the popular sentiment these days, then it does matter that when I look around the church, I know the people around me. It does matter that I can notice someone has been absent awhile and I can check on them to see if they are ok. If one has not been a member of a true and united community of Faith like this, it may be hard to understand why that community is such a treasure. This treasure should not be needlessly destroyed.

• Because small is wonderful!

• Because with the loss of churches come the loss of souls who are not as strong in the Faith or who are disillusioned by the corruption around them. These souls matter to Our Lord and should not be written off as unimportant. We need to try to help them and strengthen them in the Faith. We can only do that if our doors are open and if the churches they know, love, and are familiar with are still there. Because of this, when we close our church's doors, we often close off the last possibility that a soul will return to Holy Mother Church. Those who have already left the Church--and they are many--are no longer around to tell their stories.
  

• Because in struggling to hold on to our parish, we are hope and strength and justice to others who are not strong enough to speak up. We have been confirmed in this countless times.
  

• Because in the case of St. Mary's, we are truly an "intergenerational" community, which is something the Diocese sorely wants churches to try to be and is trying to implement in its "lifelong faith formation" program. We already are, so why destroy it only to try to rebuild something that approximates it?

• Because while we are happy to do things with others, a parish has a right to existence as stipulated by canon law. Wanting one's parish to remain as it is does not make one an "isolationist." It makes one content.

• Because our forefathers and mothers worked hard and sacrificed to give us the great gift of St. Mary's and we do not take this gift for granted.

• Because the church belongs to the people of the parish. They built and maintain it and it belongs to them.

• Because St. Mary's has been financially solvent and debt-free since 1922 and there is no reason it cannot continue to be. St. Mary's parishioners have always been very generous in donating, fundraising, and contributing their time and efforts to directly maintaining the parish. This is part of our culture.
  

• Because we are obligated, by virtue of our baptism and confirmation, to defend the church from error and attack, both from within and without. See Pope St. Pius X's encyclical against the modernists for more on this. It is not just St. Mary's and other churches that are under attack here, but the Faith itself. Purporting that our churches are "just buildings" is example enough. Look at the bishop's job positions, which include audio visual technicians whose job is to install and maintain screens and sound systems, as well as the inclusion of rock bands during mass. Visit any number of "modern" catholic churches which have had their tabernacles removed from a place of prominence on the altar. Look at how many times Bishop Galante has held up Gloucester County Community Church, an evangelical protestant church, as an example to be striven towards. We could go on. Which leads to the following point...

• Because we want to remain Catholic, and that includes holding on to our traditional churches.  

• Because St. Mary's has had and continues to have wonderful devotions available to all, including Eucharistic Adoration from Wed. morning through Friday evening every week. This is something not found at every parish.

• Because our CCD program is small, personal, affordable, our kids love it, and it is worth saving.

• Because we should not have to defend our right to exist, and no parish should.

• Because there has never been a saint who became holy by closing churches, only saints who became holy by erecting them.

• Because many priests, bishops, and even popes have been wrong in the history of the Church. We have an obligation to defend Her. Many saints have been redeemed in time. Saints Catherine of Siena, Joan of Arc, Teresa of Avila, Thomas More, and John Fisher (the only bishop to defend the Faith against evil Henry VIII), ora pro nobis!

• Because keeping open or closing a parish is not a "managerial" decision. Our Church is not a corporation and should not be run like one.
  

• Because we must obey Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and the teachings of His Church first and foremost, not men.
  

* We have written extensively on this in the past so we will not include references and links here. If you would like them, search our site or the Catholic Encyclopedia online (newadvent.com). You may also refer to the Catechism of John Paul II, the Catechism of Pope St. Pius X, the Baltimore Catechism, canon law, the writings of the Fathers of the Church, countless papal encyclicals, and on and on. That the church is "just a building" is a protestant view, not a Catholic one. Now this heterodox view is expediently and shamefully used by the very men charged with defending our Faith and our churches and because they are in positions of authority, people trust them, listen, and believe them.

Our Lady of the Lakes in Collings Lakes, formerly part of the St. Mary's Malaga, St. Rose of Lima Newfield, and Queen of Angels Parish (St. Michael's Minotola & Our Lady of Victories Landisville) merger/closure group was just permitted to remain stand-alone. Why? We have received no answer to this question. From their Nov. 15th bulletin:

I have received word from the diocesan Vicar General
that the bishop has approved the Core Team proposal that
our parish would remain a stand alone parish. But we are
encouraged to share resources and programs with the
merging parishes of Buena, Newfield, and Malaga.
This is great news for our Parish because we can continue
as usual serving the needs of the Collings Lakes area.
This is a good news 'short term' situation considering the
underlying problem of a priest shortage in our Diocese.
As more priests retire the present active priests will be
called on to do more. All of us must be ready for the future
when there may not be a priest in residence here. In the
meantime lets be a vibrant sustainable community.
To celebrate this good news we will have a wine and
cheese, coffee and cake celebration in our hall after the
Saturday evening Mass next week. Invite your friends and
family to the 5pm Mass which will have our new
'Lures of the Lakes' choir singing. Then socialize,
celebrate, and relax with your friends and neighbors.

What a slap in the face to the "process" and to all of the other churches in this diocese that would also like to remain stand-alone. "Core team" arm twisting is, apparently, part of the open and honest "process," but how such decisions are made remains a mystery to all of us. Political expedience, string-pulling, and personality conflict at high levels seem to be the order of the day. In truth, we the Catholic faithful have no real input at all, though we are required to speak the Truth by virtue of our baptism and confirmation.

Continued from Part I...

As you know, this is no exaggeration as the stripping of our churches of their Catholicity has already happened. You can step into churches like this any day of the week (that is, if they are unlocked).

Here is an imaginary dialogue that the author recreated. Sadly, it's not far off. A church I attended for some time had any number of statues of saints (very large ones, too), all of which had been quite literally trash picked. Yes, all in the name of "reform." I have also been to many churches where it was difficult to find the tabernacle or where the tabernacle was removed from the altar. One of these churches was a cathedral in a largely conservative diocese. Finally, I have seen heretical religious education texts and even met one such textbook writer/publisher in a graduate level class on Catholicism. He was a guest speaker, portrayed by the professor as a poor, persecuted reformer.

"Get your tabernacle off the altar, and put it out of the way in a corner."

"But why, Your Excellency?"

"Because I tell you to!"

"I hear and I obey."

"Now smash the altar up."

"Mine not to reason why."

"Burn the altar rails."

"Why stop now?"

"Throw out the statues."

"If you say so."

"Get rid of the Baltimore Catechism. Use this textbook."

"Has Your Excellency noticed that it's full of heresy?"

"Full of heresy, full of heresy--can't you tell the difference between heresy and contemporary insights? Have it in your school tomorrow."

"I'll get it there today."

It goes on. Now we need to go on to wonder, naturally, who is being obeyed here? Such dilemmas beg the question: at what point must we draw the line at supposed "obedience?" If we know that we are being told to do something in direct contradiction to the clear teaching of the Church, what are we and what are our priests to do? This is certainly a tough one.

The author gives many examples of divergence from orthodoxy in the case of one particular contemporary bishop and remarks that, in such cases, it is crucial that the flock be protected from error: "The manifest duty of a Catholic priest submitting himself to the supreme law of charity, showing true Catholic obedience, is to protect his people from such a bishop." He cites a well known description of the life of a layman, Eusebius, in 428:

When the shepherd turns into a wolf the first duty of the flock is to defend itself. As a general rule, doctrine comes from the bishops to the faithful, and it is not for the faithful, who are subjects in the order of Faith, to pass judgment on their superiors. But every Christian, by virtue of his title to the name Christian, has not only the necessary knowledge of the essentials of the treasure of Revelation, but also the duty of safeguarding them. The principle is the same, whether it is a matter of belief or conduct, that is of dogma or morals.

The implications of all this, as told by Davies, are quite alarming. One doesn't want to believe them, yet they ring horrifyingly true. In any case, the author claims that the only real choice for priests charged with true spiritual care of the faithful is to uphold orthodoxy--the Truth--at all costs.

To be continued.

This was originally posted January 31, 2009. We thought it was worth republishing.

Catholic theology and Church teaching are not accidental. Holy Mother Church teaches unchanging, eternal Truths. Moreover, these Truths are all connected and interconnected. Like all systems, each Truth depends upon the other; they are the structures that support the building. We do not, after all, have an atomistic system wherein one truth may stand up as a pillar without the others. Generally speaking, it is not possible, nor is it logical, to accept one teaching of the Catholic Church and dispense with the others, as if one was unrelated to the next. Once we begin to do this, the structure loses its supports and comes tumbling down.

Take, for example, our church buildings and chapels. They are designed for the worship of Christ, the King of the Universe. They are supposed to give us a glimpse of heaven. They are to surround us with examples of how we should live (depictions of the lives of Christ and the saints), who we are and were designed to be (holy sons and daughters of Our Lord), and the physical and spiritual means of getting there.


As Catholics, we believe that Christ is truly and physically present in the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar and that his Eucharistic Presence resides in the Tabernacle. If the King of the Universe resides in the Tabernacle, it only makes sense that that Tabernacle be located in a prominent place, front and center.


If the King of the Universe in the Tabernacle is located front and center in our churches, it only makes sense that we reverently face Him. If the King of the Universe is located in the Tabernacle, front and center, and we are all facing His Majesty, it only makes sense that we be able to kneel before Him in humility and out of love and devotion to Him.


If we truly believe that Jesus Christ, King and Redeemer of our fallen race has come to be with us sacramentally in the Holy Eucharist and that He resides in our Catholic churches, then our souls and minds ought to be elevated, our whole selves reminded of Him while we are in church, whether mass is going on or not. Throughout most of human history, people have not been literate, and even today we need reminders of what it means to live the Christian life. God allows us to use our senses to know Him. To glorify God and for the help of our souls, we are given works of art in the form of paintings, stained glass windows, statues, and other things within our churches.


Consider this. When you have a guest coming to your house, you clean up. You make ready. You prepare. If you were to have an "important" guest come to your house, you would want it to look good. In this case we have an important guest--the most important Guest possible, our Creator--coming to be with us, so great is His love for us. We should want all around us to remind us of His loving and sacrificial Presence.

Says the Catholic Church of England and Wales:

A Church for us is more than a building - it is a Sacred Space, filled with God's presence. Everything within that space - the paintings, the statues, the stained glass - exists for a spiritual purpose.

This is to provide people with a focus for prayer and an insight into God: literally a 'glimpse of heaven'. The word 'Patrimony' describes the Church's cultural inheritance in terms of architecture, art and artefacts. All witness to our Catholic past: a history of persecution, struggle and ultimately, revival. We are just custodians, with a duty to preserve these sacred treasures for the future. Today we also create the Patrimony of tomorrow by commissioning high quality Sacred art.

But now, after roughly two thousand years of Holy Mother Church teaching us

• about the sacredness the church building,
• about how we must be ever vigilant of the possibility of sacrilege not only personally but also in our churches and shrines,
• about how Our Lord would be with us even until the end of time both spiritually and in the Holy Eucharist in our churches and sacred places,
• about Christians sacrificing all they had materially and even their own lives for the sake of their holy churches erection and continuation,
  
• to fall on our knees before God in our beloved churches,

now, in late twentieth and early twenty-first century America we are told to believe that our churches are "just buildings" and we ought not be attached to them. I don't know about you, but my mother taught me when I was just a child that this is one of the most important things that distinguishes us as Catholics from the protestants: our churches are open because we believe that they are holy places, that Our Lord is there, and that they are not just buildings. My mother was no liar.

Places where Our Lord has come to us sacramentally in His unbloody sacrifice, day after day after day, we are now told to believe are buildings like any other. That isn't Catholicism. That is materialism. And that, my friends, is precisely what the devil himself would have us believe. To believe our churches are only buildings would be to deny Our Lord's Eucharistic Presence, our ultimate and eternal destiny, and that for which we were created--the worship of God. In fact, to claim that our churches are just buildings would be to deny our spiritual nature, the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, and even our sacred baptisms and confirmations. To claim that our churches are just buildings is to deny the validity of their consecrations and blessings. To claim that our churches are just buildings is an insidious lie. And a lie is a lie no matter who says it.

By a decree of the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII), Mass should not be celebrated in any place except a consecrated or blessed church. Hence it is the wish of the Church that at least cathedrals and parish churches be solemnly consecrated, and that smaller churches be blessed (Cong. Sac. Rit., 7 Aug., 1875), but any church and public or semi-public oratory may be consecrated (Cong. Sac. Rit., 5 June, 1899). Both by consecration and by blessing a church is dedicated to Divine worship, which forbids its use for common or profane purposes. Consecration is a rite reserved to a bishop, who by the solemn anointing with holy chrism, and in the prescribed form, dedicates a building to the service of God, thereby raising it in perpetuum to a higher order, removing it from the malign influence of Satan, and rendering it a place in which favours are more graciously granted by God (Pontificale Romanum).  (From New Advent, the Catholic Encyclopedia.)

In the past, Catholics and Catholic buildings alike have been the targets of hatred and persecution. I need not list the litany of specific examples, but priests have been tarred and feathered, buildings blown up, altars desecrated, the Sacred Body of Our Lord maligned, churches vandalized. The history of anti-Catholicism in this country is well-documented and is, in fact, alive and well today. Of course in this country Catholics not even permitted to run for public office (and even when they were, there was serious doubt about their "patriotism"). Catholics have experienced horrible persecution in this and other countries, and by extension our houses of worship desecrated in the worst possible ways. Suffice it to say that many of you have likely heard the stories of your own ancestors and what they went through to preserve the faith, or even just to get to mass. I know I grew up hearing these stories of perseverance in the Faith, and my own family sacrificed much and for that I am so proud and so grateful. It is a great privilege to be born into a good Catholic family and to receive the benefits of our patrimony. The fruit of all that sacrifice is made real to us by virtue of worshiping in the places bequeathed to us by our ancestors and by the grace of God.


It is amazing that at this point in American Catholic history, instead of the Catholic Church being the object of hostile attacks from without, our church buildings and even the Church itself is being attacked from within. Sadly, our shepherds are leading their sheep astray, and many souls will be lost. Instead of protecting our churches, our patrimony, they are being closed (and often the contents sold on ebay) and when faithful Catholics hold tight to the timeless teachings of their Faith, they are called all manner of things from "disobedient" to "unchristian" and worse. Sometimes these attacks are leveled, shamefully, by their own priests and bishops. Yes, many of the very bishops who

• harbored child abusers, shuffling them from one parish to the next
• affiliate themselves and do business with the likes of criminals who would steal churches and schools right out from under unsuspecting Catholics
• allow the rampant sexual impropriety of priests in their diocese
• advocate such unorthodox doctrine as married, gay, and "womyn" priests; as well as downplay of the sacrificial nature of the mass and many other things
• repeatedly lie to the faithful in matters ranging from real estate transactions to canon law to theological Truth
  
• justify closing churches by claiming there's a "priest shortage" and then persecuting and sending away priests by the dozen...
  

...yes, some of the very same bishops would be so blind and arrogant as to criticize the faithful Catholics who merely want to worship their Lord and Savior in the manner they always have: in their own churches. This is an outrage, and it should not be tolerated by any thinking Catholic.

Today I was in Eucharistic Adoration with my two kids. No, it was not the most meditative or peaceful time I've ever had in church, and frankly I was grateful that there wasn't anyone else there during my hour as there usually are, since they might have been disturbed by the kids. In any case, I picked up a brochure someone had dropped off on the table near the door. The brochure is entitled, "Terri Schiavo's Final Hours: An Eyewitness Account," by the well known Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests For Life.

I found his account of the ordeal intriguing and disturbing to say the least. Let me share with you a few quotes from the pamphlet:

After I said these things [namely that Michael Schiavo, his attorney Mr. Felos, and Judge Greer were murderers], Mr. Felos and others in sympathy with him began attacking me in the press and before the cameras. Some news outlets began making a story out of their attacks and said I was "fanning the flames" of enmity and hatred.

Hmmm, I thought. Something about this sounds very familiar to me. Someone speaks out with God's honest truth and he is made out as, well, the worst possible thing he could be today: Not Nice! The implication, of course, is that Fr. Pavone is just another wacky fundy Fundamentalist who wishes to impose his inflexible moral rules on others, disrespecting Terri's supposed right to die, thus making him a hateful person. (Basically anyone with moral or religious backbone these days is pegged a "fundamentalist," hate-filled, or just a big meanie.) Fr. Pavone continues:

Actually, there's a simple reason why they are so angry with me. They had hoped that they could present Terri's death as a merciful and gentle act. My words took the veil of euphemism away, calling this a killing, and giving eyewitness testimony to the fact that it was anything but gentle. Mr. Felos is a euthanasia advocate, and like all such advocates, he needs to manipulate the language, to sell death in an attractive package...

Wow, this sounds even more familiar. How many times in the course of human history have politicians and others had to pretty up something so overtly evil, so immoral? Something they know to be just plain wrong? "Gathering God's Gifts," anyone? Are our churches being "euthenized?"

One of the attacks they made was that a "spiritual person" like a priest should be speaking words of compassion and understanding, instead of venom.

Ahhh, the old "be Christian" routine. The "you hypocrite who claims to be a Christian but doesn't act like one" head trip. As if "being Christian" is equivalent with being a spineless nicy nice, simply a person with very good manners. What a load of horse manure.

But compassion demands truth. A priest is also a prophet, and if he cannot cry out against evil, then he cannot bring about reconciliation. If there is going to be any healing...it must start with repentance on the part of those who murdered Terri and now try to cover it up with flowery language.

Part of the Christian life, as taught best to us by the Church's many martyrs for the Faith, is the necessity of calling a spade a spade and defending the Truth. What a shame so many fall prey to evil dressed up as good, wolves in sheep's clothing, and church closure programs portrayed as promotion rather than a demotion of the Faith.

Another aspect of the Terri Schiavo tragedy is that many people misunderstand its cause and therefore its solution. They think the problem was that Terri did not leave any written instructions... Terri's case is not about the withdrawal of life-saving medical treatment, but rather about the killing of a healthy person whose life some regarded as worthless. Terri was not dying, was not on life support, and did not have any terminal illness. Because some thought she would not want to live with her disability, they insisted on introducing the cause of death, namely, dehydration.

At this point the parallels being drawn were simply unbelievable. The Diocese of Camden's Administration has presented a list of supposed problems within the Diocese (although they have presented contradictory statements numerous times)--its symptoms of terminal illness--and expected the veracity of these supposed problems to go unchallenged, the Administration's chosen responses received without question. Even if we the Christian faithful were to accept their diagnoses, then must we accept their solution? Not necessarily. But misunderstanding supposed causes of our problems in the Diocese is half the problem.

In so many cases, churches threatened with closure (death) are not dying, not on life support, and without "terminal illnesses." But their causes of death were about to be handily introduced from on high. Our "Speak Up Sessions," our "living wills" so to speak, were the venues at which so many allegedly clamored to have their churches merged and closed. As Fr. Pavone says, "what good is a living will supposed to accomplish, aside from saying, 'Please don't argue about killing me, just kill me?'"

If we had enough priests to go around when we began (and we did), the bishop would make sure that we had an inadequate number by the time he was through, creating the priest shortage "terminal illness" he so desired. He and McGrath were careful to disallow various orders of priests from offering their services within the Diocese, and, we have been told by inside sources, actively discouraged vocations to the diocesan priesthood through emotional intimidation and screening processes, neither of which are unique to our Diocese. (For more on such screening processes we recommend you read Michael Rose's excellently researched book, Goodbye Good Men.)

In any case, what we're talking about is the killing of healthy churches whose life some in positions of power regard as worthless. They insist on introducing the cause of death. Fr. Pavone continues:

What we run the risk of losing is the right to receive the most basic humane care--like food and water--in the event we have a disability.

Human beings, of course, have a right to life! And according to Canon Law, parishes also have a right to existence as juridic persons. The good ol' Baltimore Catechism (#132) states that "when these buildings we call churches are blessed or consecrated, they become holy." And the Church Herself said in the Council of Trent that all parish churches should be consecrated and they "may never be transferred to common or profane uses." Why then are all of our churches, our juridic persons, suddenly disposable?

It occurred to me that what is currently happening throughout the United States is this. Certain bishops have decided that our churches--which have rights as juridic persons under Canon Law and Church law generally--and by extension we the Catholic faithful who have built and maintained and worshiped in these churches, no longer deserve the dignity God Himself accords us. We no longer have the right to receive the most basic spiritual care--like the Bread of Life and the Blood of Christ--in our own churches. (It is unlikely any great accident that many of the targeted churches are among the most architecturally traditional). Similarly our consecrated parishes are no longer deserving of the most basic dignity by virtue of their holy usage as having the "Gospel preached in them, the Sacraments administered in them, and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass offered in them" (Baltimore Catechism #132).

In a model where human beings are considered bodies without souls, our churches are considered mere brick-and-mortar buildings lacking the animating Spirit of God. Therefore they are being dispensed with as if they had no meaning or importance whatsoever, as if they were "just buildings" (a phrase the Diocesan Administration has used time and again). In our current materialist culture, this sentiment is no great surprise. Fr. Pavone continues:

But we have a basic obligation to preserve our own life. A person who leaves clear instructions that they don't want to be fed is breaking the moral law by requesting suicide.

Every word Fr. Pavone speaks in this pamphlet is so very true, I thought. Certainly every person is deserving of his God given right to both physical and spiritual sustenance. In turn, we have an obligation to preserve and promote the Faith, which is our very Life. This one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Faith is the very essence of our churches and our parish communities, and these churches and communities are being attacked without cause. We must stand for Truth at all costs and never allow ourselves to be deprived of our own basic dignity. To stand idly by and watch our communities, our dignity, our spiritual welfare, our very FAITH be torn to shreds would be to deny it, and therefore to commit spiritual suicide. This is the culture of death.*

So by the time I was done reading this pamphlet, I wondered, is even the Church not immune from the culture of death? It seemed to me that the same heterodox and secular model Fr. Pavone spoke of, the culture of death which is so prevalent in our culture today, is now being applied to our churches and in a general sense, to the Faith as we know it. This time, the model has infested the highest levels of our Diocese.


* The "culture of death" is a phrase coined by the late Pope John Paul II and is described in his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae

I received my most recent Coming Home Network International newsletter yesterday. In it, evangelical convert Keith Moore describes his journey into the Catholic Church. A combination of largely unchurched, Methodist, "nondenominational," and house church in background, he describes his first experience inside a Catholic church. He was visiting Washington state and attended mass at St. Aloysius, near Gonzaga University.

I will never forget walking into that beautiful Cathedral. I had never seen the Stations of the Cross. I had never seen such amazing stained glass windows, not just for their beauty, but for the stories they told of God's work in our lives. The statues were amazing...they suddenly seemed to me very important because of what they pointed to. I was almost trembling by the time we left that day.

St. Aloysius was built in 1911. How many "new" or modern Catholic churches have you seen that contain purposeful, beautiful, and inspiring art? I myself have seen almost none. That's not to say that it cannot be done, but that it usually is not.

What we have already in existence in the Diocese of Camden are churches that already have these things. St. Mary's, though small, has these things. It is not just a building, it is truly a house of God. It is through sacred art and the structure of a traditional Catholic church that we learn about the Faith. In and of itself, by virtue of its presence, it is a means of evangelization.

Beautiful churches draws in those who who know little about Catholicism, often without them even realizing why. In attempting to make our churches, and therefore our Faith palatable to those currently outside it, many have tried to lower the bar and create "spaces" that are less overtly Catholic and consequently less intimidating to those who do not understand the purpose of beautiful art inside a house of God. But in doing this we lose the very thing that makes our Church attractive to those who seek to join It. Our traditional Catholic churches are treasures that not only have historic merit, but serve an important purpose in our continual conversion.

When I am at mass at St. Mary's, I see all around me in the stained glass windows the saints who are interceding for us in Heaven, the angels who are witnesses at each and every holy sacrifice of the mass, and I am reminded of my place in God's order. Churches like St. Mary's should not be so flippantly dispensed with. They are God's silent tools of conversion.

This article is part of a multi-part series and will continue over the next couple weeks.

#1-3, the Theologically Obvious Reasons

1. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Matthew 28:19 The biblical commentary that follows the Great Commission is this:

"All power"... See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ's church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14.

In destroying parishes, which are active communities of the baptized faithful, erected for the permanent* and proper worship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the priests and bishops that help to suppress them are in effect doing the opposite of what is outlined by Our Lord in the Gospels.

* According to the Council of Trent, consecrated churches "it may never be transferred to common or profane uses." (All parish churches should be solemnly consecrated.)

2. As believers in Christ Crucified, we shall not succumb to the sin of despair, one of the greatest sins against Almighty God. In closing down and consolidating churches, we are in effect saying that there is no hope that souls can be saved in the future, no hope in the promise of evangelization, no hope that the Church will increase. We will have said that God is no longer the supplier of hope to His people! As Bishop Galante famously said, we cannot sit around and wait for a miracle. Well we definitely cannot just sit around. But miracles are What God Does! Miracles are God's Business. If He saves one soul in all the souls He ever created, it is a miracle. If after His Son's gift of the Eucharist (a miracle), His subsequent death and resurrection (The Single Greatest Miracle of All Time), He gave us just one saint, one visitation from His Holy Mother, it would be a miracle. He has given us countless miracles. We must not despair that, with our help and the help of even a few priests on fire for the Lord, the Church cannot grow. The growth of the Church is, in fact, the Promise of God.

3. Instead of catechizing, being true preachers zealous in evangelizing God's Word, they have decided to tuck their tails between their legs and sulk away, citing [inaccurate] demographical data and not the Gospel They've chosen to give up and pack it in. But is that what Christ told us to do. NO! In all three Synoptic Gospels it is written, "And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off even the dust of your feet, for a testimony against them." In other words, keep on going!

Contrast this with what was written in this week's Star Herald. The Star Herald reprinted the CNS article, "Reconfigurations evolve in rapidly changing church." Bishop Lennon, the Merge Master of the Cleveland Diocese and elsewhere, says, "It's not just about downsizing...that's just a partial view of what we are about." Doesn't it make you wonder...has this Bishop Lennon read Christ's words? Our Lord did not say, "Go therefore, and downsize, should the demographic data appear to warrant that."

We know that the church closures are not about money. Truly, whatever is lacking could surely be found. (The Diocese owns so much unused real estate and has plenty of money.) And besides, some of the most financially viable churches in the Diocese have been slated for closure. But many persist in believing the closures are about money.

Worse still, there are priests and pastors out there who claim that if a church cannot support itself, it has no right to exist.

(Keep in mind that debt is sometimes incurred due to the necessity of paying assessments to the Diocese and certain amounts to support local Catholic schools, whether or not parishioners actually make use of or can afford tuition at these schools. Barring these two things, most churches do not have any problem paying their utility bills and maintaining their properties. We should also remember that by virtue of threatening certain churches with closure, the bishop has scared off many Catholics from the Faith or their parishes altogether, causing a great deal of confusion, despair, and decreased church attendance, all of which affect collections.)

In any case, what we need to ask ourselves is this: As Christians, should it be the case that those churches who are wealthier deserve to exist, while those who are poorer do not? What kind of an attitude is that? Is it Catholic? Is it even Christian?

In fact, it is neither. Our Lord did not recommend that the poor go out and attempt to become rich, but that it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God. Jesus said that the treasure of the poor would be great in heaven, and that the Kingdom of God belonged to them, that the heavenly banquet would be theirs!

The burden of coming to the aid of the less fortunate parishes in a Diocese falls upon the wealthier ones. And it is the job of the shepherds--the bishop and priests--to see to it that all the faithful have churches in which to worship. The effort to evangelize, not consolidate, should be in the forefront of all of our minds.

If it is believed that a prior pastor lacked the ability to financially manage his parish, then is it fair that the laity be forced to lose their church as a result? We of course know that this is only an excuse to do something we all know to be wrong, but the point is this: shepherds of  flocks in need should help them find ways to subsist.

Let us not delude ourselves. The role of a true pastor is not to persecute his flock, but to help them grow in Christ. He should be acting as a healer and not a henchman. No priest who plans on closing churches may be construed as a prophet unwelcome in his own country.

Let us look to St. St. John Vianney, one of the most unlikely saints of all. Thought to be a poor student, and having failed his seminary exams, he was finally ordained due only to his piety. He was sent to a teeny tiny French village called Ars:

Two decades after the French Revolution inspired massacres of 300 priests in France, there was a desperate need for priests....In a village of 40 houses, there were 4 taverns. Church attendance was very low, the farmers worked on Sunday, everyone spend their time drinking and swearing. It was a 'punishment parish' and the people laid bets on how long this new priest would last. But the new Cure of Ars surprised them all.

Someone peeked in his window and saw that he prayed all night. Others noticed that he removed all the fine furniture from the rectory and turned the parlour into a woodshed. He gave his clothes away to the poor and ate only two potatoes a day. Others reported that though his voice seemed to hurt their ears, his sermons stirred their hearts. He became part of the village life as well, visiting all the homes, and helping the villagers with their daily lives. He helped a shop owner with his bookkeeping, prescribed remedies for whooping cough, and when a tavern closed for lack of business, raised money for the owner to buy a farm, then tore the tavern down.

Twelve years later, people would say 'Ars is no longer Ars.' Everyone went to the three hour masses. The farmers prayed the rosary as they worked in the fields. When Father Vianney heard confessions, people would stand in line for hours....People travelled for miles and from around the world to make a confession to him. Sinners were converted at a few words from him. By the end of his life, he spend 16 to 18 hours a day in the confessional, and he was mobbed whenever he appeared. He heard 20,000 confessions a year, up to 300 a day.

In a country that had murdered great numbers of its priests, and discouraged the practicing of the Catholic faith John Vianney moved like a bright light, restoring faith and healing hearts....

The heroes of his youth were those priests who refused to submit to the French revolutionary government's nationalization of the Church, and risked martyrdom to celebrate Mass in secret in houses and barns of the faithful. John began to practice mortifications in imitation of these priests and as sacrifice for sinners from an early age.

When he was ordained and sent to Ars, he continued these austerities. He disposed of the fine furniture in the rectory, and used the money to help the poor of the parish. He spend hours in prayer, hours in the confessional and more hours serving the day to day needs of his parishioners.

In the entire village in which St. John Vianney lived, there were only a couple hundred people. Now a parish with 250 families is said not to have a right to exist! Oh how far we have fallen. This saint of saints and priest of priests spared nothing for his flock. What are the priests who should be imitating this great saint doing today? Busy figuring out how to close churches? We hope not. Let us pray that all priests, pastors, and bishops see the Light and heed the commands of Our Lord, to "preach the gospel to the poor."

What does that mean? "Modesty" (or immodesty), particularly from the point of view of appearance, is not a popular thing to talk about these days. It is a mark of just how far our society has fallen when all talk of modesty is a mark of old-fashionedness or prudishness! But it's so important for so many reasons, even just from a secular perspective. But since we're focusing on Catholic Christian modesty here, that's what we'll talk about.

A lengthy essay on all the lofty ideas regarding modesty is not what's intended here. So much more can be, and has been, said on the topic. This is only a reminder of why this is such an important subject for the Christian. Let's look at St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans 12:1-2:

I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing unto God, your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world; but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may prove what is the good, and the acceptable, and the perfect will of God.

That's pretty straightforward. Our bodies are temples of the Living God and as such should be presented to Him in a way that would please Him. And we should not be concerned with the passing things of the world, but with God, His will, and the things of eternity.

Now let's look at what the most recent Catechism has to say about modesty:

Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies. The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.(2523-2524)

What may we glean from this? (1) That fashions, whether immodest or modest, are not to be of concern to the Christian, since this world--along with all its vanities--is passing. (2) That God, who loves us, has endowed us with inherent dignity. (3) That we should teach modesty to our children in order for them to properly respect themselves and others.

How does this relate to a person's manner of attire? If we look at what the Church teaches us in the Catechism alone, without further looking to past popes or the saints and what they have said on the subject, then it seems fairly simple. We ought to dress according to what we are: sons and daughters of the Most High God. We dress not to impress people, but to respect God and ourselves. Since our bodies are temples of the Holy Ghost, we ought to remember this and keep ourselves properly covered as much as possible.

Further, if we are attending mass, it is of utmost importance that we remember in whose presence we are. We are before our Eucharistic Lord, all the angles, and the saints who worship with us. If we were going to an important meeting, to a wedding, to court, to a restaurant, we would dress appropriately. How much more important it is to dress appropriately before the Holy Trinity: Jesus in the Eucharist, God the Father who is our ultimate and just Judge, and with the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.

And of course, we should always remember Our Lady when we dress for holy mass. Remember Her message at Fatima, that "certain fashions are going to be introduced which will offend Our Lord very much....the Church has no fashions; Our Lord is always the same."

"Our Lord is always the same." What is Our Lady reminding us of here? This world is fleeting, but our lives with God are eternal. Heaven is our home. God desires our obedience because He loves us, and our manner of dress can be an example of this. In a seemingly small way, our modesty in dress in an immodest world can be a reminder to those around us of Him with whom our allegiance lies.

In a practical sense, does this mean we have to dress up all the time? Of course not. How impractical that would be. In fact, the beautiful St. Ambrose said so many centuries ago:

The body should be bedecked naturally and without affectation, with simplicity, with negligence rather than nicety, not with costly and dazzling apparel, but with ordinary clothes, so that nothing be lacking to honesty and necessity, yet nothing be added to increase its beauty.

St. Ambrose makes it clear that it is possible to dress in a dignified way, without revealing too much of our bodies, without going to great expense or extravagance, simply and neatly, while still being able to function in our daily activities.* It's important that we refrain from promoting a lack of chastity and respect.

At mass we join all of Heaven in worshiping God, who grants us an unspeakable grace when He becomes present bodily for us. It is incumbent upon us that we remember this great gift--the salvation that was won by His suffering and death on the cross, and His continued Eucharistic love for us--and leave our tank tops and shorts at home.

The Catholic Encyclopedia says this:

In the government of the exterior of a man modesty aims to make it conform to the demands of decency and decorousness (honestas).

Interestingly, the Catholic Encyclopedia places its discussion of modesty under the heading of "temperance," which is considered a cardinal virtue, because modesty has to do with moderation and self-control.**

Though the topic of dress is of concern to both men and women, the problem of modesty so often falls to women since what is depicted as "attractive" attire for women (and even girls) is so often sexually explicit and demeaning. Therefore it is so easy to lose perspective as to what is appropriate. So let's just try to remember what the great St. Francis de Sales said in his Introduction to the Devout Life, and we cannot go wrong:

...avoid all affectation, vanity, curiosity, or levity in your dress. Keep yourself always, as much as possible, on the side of plainness and modesty, which, without doubt, is the greatest ornament of beauty, and the best excuse for the want of it.

* The Angelic Doctor discusses St. Ambrose as well as St. Gregory the Great, Aristotle, St. Cyprian, and St. Augustine here. Please see also Turtullian here: On the Apparel of Women.
**Although the Angelic Doctor distinguishes between temperance and modesty.

Clarifying a Misleading Diocesan Administrator on Prayer

When Marilyn Vollmer tried to explain prayer to the multitudes, she said we often don't receive what we pray for. I thought and prayed about that point when I was in first grade. I later found out that we often get something better than what we pray for.* In fact, true prayer--which Marilyn Vollmer ought to study because her immortal soul depends on it--always has a primary goal to give honor and glory to God.

Our Lord teaches us that fact in the Our Father. The fact that the first words and the Name of that prayer are stressing the relationship we have with God. Any other reason for praying is secondary, far down on the list of genuine prayer. "Lifting of the mind and heart to God" says everything. No conveners or facilitators need apply.


Prayer and Our Blessed Mother

In our battle against the devil Catholics make the consecration to Our Lord through the Immaculate Heart of Mary and that is true prayer. Our Blessed Mother's prayer, which is subordinate to the Our Father but flows from it, gives all honor and glory to God. "My soul doth magnify the Lord" (St. Luke 1:46). The actions of our Blessed Mother and St. Elizabeth portray the perfection of prayer.

First, there is the salutation of our Blessed Mother that leads to the sanctification of her child, St. John, in her womb. This encounter is the model for all who hold human life sacred. When prayer is performed properly, great and majestic events take place.

Our Blessed Mother greets us in every prayer because she is always united to Our Lord and brings Our Lord to us. St. Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost (St. Luke 1:41). This is what happens to us in our devotion to our Blessed Mother. Unbelievers don't allow these words to penetrate the heart. Believers never doubt nor fear the encounter with Jesus through the intercession of His Mother.


Proper Lenten Prayer and Practices

That is why our prayers enable us to prepare for Lent properly as in the Latin Ordo (calendar of the saints). We dismiss the apostates'** practices of stones in the holy water font, having the Resurrected Lord in place of the Crucified Lord, failure to practice bodily mortification (we practice penance), substituting yoga instead of the Stations of the Cross, and ignoring the law of abstinence on Fridays. The apostates in the Church like to tell us how they enjoyed their vacations. There aren't any vacations in Hell.***


Holy Examples are No Accident: They are God's Grace!

Sr.Mary Celine of the Felician Sisters of Lodi taught us the above in the seventh grade. We knew of that material on prayer before that, but Sr. Mary Celine stood out by living that prayer in a cheerful way. It was a grace for me to find out that Sr. Mary Celine often visited a family at St. Mary's, Malaga long before I came here. Those graces never stop coming to our Shrine Parish!

Praised be Jesus Christ,
Now and Forever!
Father Jerome C. Romanowski, Pastor


* From the Editor: God answers all prayers of his children! But the problem of the current diocesan administration is something we've long known at Savestmarys: they have no hope.
 

Hope is the theological virtue by which we desire the Kingdom of Heaven and eternal life as our happiness, placing our trust in Christ's promises and relying not on our own strength, but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit. "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful.... We can therefore hope in the glory of heaven promised by God to those who love him and do his will. In every circumstance, each one of us should hope, with the grace of God, to persevere 'to the end' and to obtain the joy of heaven, as God's eternal reward for the good works accomplished with the grace of Christ. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1817-1821)

See also the following texts, all of which show how those people currently running the diocese into the ground lack are confusing the faithful with their words:

• John 16: 23-24: Amen, amen I say to you: if you ask the Father any thing in my name, he will give it you. Hitherto you have not asked any thing in my name. Ask, and you shall receive; that your joy may be full.

• Mark 11: 21-23: And Peter remembering, said to him: Rabbi, behold the fig tree, which thou didst curse, is withered away. And Jesus answering, saith to them: Have the faith of God. Amen I say to you, that whosoever shall say to this mountain, Be thou removed and be cast into the sea, and shall not stagger in his heart, but believe, that whatsoever he saith shall be done; it shall be done unto him. Therefore I say unto you, all things, whatsoever you ask when ye pray, believe that you shall receive; and they shall come unto you.

• Matthew 21: 18-22: And in the morning, returning into the city, he was hungry. And seeing a certain fig tree by the way side, he came to it, and found nothing on it but leaves only, and he saith to it: May no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever. And immediately the fig tree withered away. And the disciples seeing it wondered, saying: How is it presently withered away? And Jesus answering, said to them: Amen, I say to you, if you shall have faith, and stagger not, not only this of the fig tree shall you do, but also if you shall say to this mountain, Take up and cast thyself into the sea, it shall be done. And in all things whatsoever you shall ask in prayer, believing, you shall receive.

• Interestingly, see James 4:1-5, the section summarized as, "The evils that flow from yielding to concupiscence and being friends to this world." Perhaps this is why Ms. Volmer does not receive that for which she purports to pray.
  

  From whence are wars and contentions among you? Are they not hence, from your concupiscences, which war in your members? You covet, and have not: you kill, and envy, and can not obtain. You contend and war, and you have not, because you ask not. You ask, and receive not; because you ask amiss: that you may consume it on your concupiscences. Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God. Or do you think that the scripture saith in vain: To envy doth the spirit covet which dwelleth in you.

• Again, if we keep his commandments. See 1John 3:21-22: Dearly beloved, if our heart do not reprehend us, we have confidence towards God: And whatsoever we shall ask, we shall receive of him: because we keep his commandments, and do those things which are pleasing in his sight.

• Matthew 7: 6-10: Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you. Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. For every one that asketh, receiveth: and he that seeketh, findeth: and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened. Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he reach him a stone? Or if he shall ask him a fish, will he reach him a serpent?

• Luke 11: 9-13: And I say to you, Ask, and it shall be given you: seek, and you shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you. For every one that asketh, receiveth; and he that seeketh, findeth; and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened. And which of you, if he ask his father bread, will he give him a stone? or a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask an egg, will he reach him a scorpion? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father from heaven give the good Spirit to them that ask him?

**Footnote from Father Romanowski: An apostate is one who denounces the teachings of the Catholic Church and instead malpractices a denomination (that is, a cult).

***Emphasis above from the Editor.

On the wonderful blog romancatholicblog.com is an entry that is about a year and a half old that truly speaks to our current situation here in the Diocese of Camden. All due credit to the author, whose name isn't given but whose email is "Maximus." We just stumbled upon this entry today.

Click here to read the piece on his blog.

Is It A Sin To Rebuke A Priest?

A reader has suggested that it is sinful to speak ill of a priest or a bishop and that rather than speak out against corruption within the clergy, Catholics should pray and remain silent.

I couldn't disagree more.

Although I would caution Catholics against the sin of rash judgment, and remind people to be mindful of the requirements of the Eighth Commandment, I firmly maintain that Catholics have a duty to rebuke the clergy when they have gone astray and to warn others against such clerics so they will not be confused by the errors wayward priests and/or bishops are observed to be spreading.

There are provisions for rebuking clergy described in Sacred Scripture:

"Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning." (1 Timothy 5:19-20)

"If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector." (Matthew 18:15-17)

There are also examples:

"And when Kephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he clearly was wrong.   For, until some people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to draw back and separated himself, because he was afraid of the circumcised.   And the rest of the Jews (also) acted hypocritically along with him, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.  But when I saw that they were not on the right road in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Kephas in front of all,  'If you, though a Jew, are living like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews ?'" (Galatians 2:11-14)

During the Arian heresy, approximately one third of the bishops in the Church became Arian, along with countless priests and entire dioceses. Yet if we are to believe, as apparently some Catholics do, that priests and bishops may never be corrected, never challenged, and/or never exposed, it was wrong to say that Arian priests and bishops were teaching error.

The same would follow for countless other heretical sects that had their origins in heretical Catholic clergy.

Martin Luther was a Catholic priest. Can he not be criticized?

Saints were often critical of priests and religious:

St. Catherine of Siena made a pilgrimage to Avignon in Southern France to persuade the Pontiff Pope Gregory XI to return from exile to Rome where he belonged. After the death of Gregory XI on March 26, 1378, the Great Schism began when Pope Urban VI was selected as his successor. Several of the dissident French cardinals objected and elected their own at Fondi Robert of Geneva who became the antipope Clement VII and set up his headquarters in Avignon. St. Catherine knew Urban was the true Pope and did all in her power to secure support for him and end the schism. While she was a staunch supporter of his Primacy, she did not hesitate to rebuke him when she saw weakness or knew he was wrong.

St. Catherine was also critical of priests in her Dialogue (the work which was the primary reason she was made a Doctor of the Church):

"Your miseries are not hid from you now, for the worm of conscience sleeps no longer, but is gnawing you, the devils shout and render to you the reward which they are accustomed to give their servants, that is to say, confusion and condemnation; they wish to bring you to despair, so that at the moment of death you may not escape from their hands, and therefore they try to confuse you, so that afterwards when you are with them they may render to you of the part which is theirs. Oh, wretch! the dignity in which I placed you, you now see shining as it really is, and you know to your shame that you have held and used in such guilty darkness the substance of the holy Church, that you see yourself to be a thief, a debtor, who ought to pay his debt to the poor and the holy Church. Then your conscience represents to you that you have spent the money on public harlots, and have brought up your children and enriched your relations, and have thrown it away on gluttony and on many silver vessels and other adornments for your house. Whereas you should have lived in voluntary poverty."

"Your conscience represents to you the divine office which you neglected, by which you fell into the guilt of mortal sin, and how even when you recited it with your mouth your heart was far from Me. Conscience also shows you your subjects, that is to say, the love and hunger which you should have felt towards nourishing them in virtue, giving them the example of your life and striking them with the hand of mercy and the rod of justice, and because you did the contrary your conscience and the horrible likeness of the Devil reproves you."

"And if as a prelate you have given prelacies or any charge of souls unjustly to one of your subjects, that is, that you have not considered to whom and how you were giving it, the Devil puts this also before your conscience, because you ought to have given it, not on account of pleasant words, nor in order to please creatures, nor for the sake of gifts, but solely with regard to virtue, My honor and the salvation of souls. And since you have not done so you are reproved, and for your greater pain and confusion you have before your conscience and the light of your intellect that which you have done and ought not to have done, and that which you ought to have done and have not done."

The reforms of St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross were due to the laxity in their religious order. Both were openly critical of such laxity and met with opposition because of their reforms.

The Norbertine Order was started because of the widespread laxity, and even debauchery among priests in St. Norbert's day. St. Norbert exhorted and even rebuked his fellow priests, and they responded by attempting to assassinate him.

It is ludicrous to think that clerics are beyond correction, as if infallible by virtue of their office. It is disturbing that such a simplistic outlook exists after the egregious wrongdoing (and that is putting things mildly) of so many priests and even bishops was exposed because of the sex abuse scandal that rocked the Church in recent years.

The 1983 Code of Canon Law makes provisions for the laity to address their concerns about priests:

Canon 212:

§1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.

§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

I also include the following for consideration:

"When there is an imminent danger for the Faith, Prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects." ~ St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 4

"It is better that scandals arise than the truth be suppressed." ~ Pope St. Gregory the Great

"When circumstances make it necessary, it is not prelates alone who have to watch over the integrity of the faith." ~ Pope Leo XIII

"The road to hell is paved with the skulls of erring priests, with bishops as their signposts." ~ St. John Chrysostom (347-407), Doctor of the Church, generally considered the most prominent doctor of the Greek Church and the greatest preacher ever heard in a Christian pulpit.

"The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops." ~ St. Athanasius

"The road to hell is paved with the skulls of bishops." ~ Saint John Eudes

"But how, I ask, does it happen that the saints, who live only for God, resist their ordination through a sense of their unworthiness, and that some run blindly to the priesthood, and rest not until they attain it by lawful or unlawful means? Ah. Unhappy men! Says St. Bernard, to be registered among the priests of God shall be for them the same as to be enrolled on the catalogue of the damned. And why? Because such persons are generally called to the priesthood, not by God, but by relatives, by interest, or ambition. Thus they enter the house of God, not through the motive a priest should have, but through worldly motives. Behold why the faithful are abandoned, the Church dishonored, so many souls perish, and with them such priests are also damned." ~ St. Alphonsus de Liguori (1696-1787), Doctor of the Church (Moral Theology), Founder of the Redemptorist congregation

Saints were even critical of homosexual priests and/or religious:

"Any cleric or monk who seduces young men or boys, or who is apprehended in kissing or in any shameful situation, shall be publicly flogged and shall lose his clerical tonsure. Thus shorn, he shall be disgraced by spitting into his face, bound in iron chains, wasted by six months of close confinement, and for three days each week put on barley bread given him toward evening. Following this period, he shall spend a further six months living in a small segregated courtyard in the custody of a spiritual elder, kept busy with manual labor and prayer, subjected to vigils and prayers, forced to walk at all times in the company of two spiritual brothers, never again allowed to associate with young men for purposes of improper conversation or advice." ~ St. Basil the Great (329-379), Bishop of Caesarea, Father of the Church, and one of the most distinguished Doctors of the Church.

"The befouling cancer of sodomy is, in fact, spreading so through the clergy or rather, like a savage beast, is raging with such shameless abandon through the flock of Christ, that for many of them it would be more salutary to be burdened with service in the world than, under the pretext of religion, to be enslaved so easily under the iron rule of satanic tyranny. It would be better for them to perish alone as laymen that, after having changed their attire but not their disposition, to drag others with them to destruction, as Truth itself testifies when It says, "But if anyone is a cause of stumbling to one of these little ones, it would be better for him to be drowned in the depths of the sea with a great millstone round his neck." Unless immediate effort be exerted by the Apostolic See, there is little that, even if one wished to curb this unbridled evil, he could not check the momentum of its progress."

"Unquestionable, this vice, since it surpasses the enormity of all others, is impossible to compare with any other vice. Without fail it brings death of the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind, prepares a trap for the traveller and secures the pit and makes it impossible for the victim to escape. It opens up Hell and closes the gates Paradise, changes a citizen of the Heavenly Jerusalem into an heir of infernal Babylon, and turns a Heavenly star into chaff for eternal fire; it cuts off a member of the Church and hurls him into the depths of the devouring flames of Hell." ~ St. Peter Damian (1007 -1072), Doctor of the Church, Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia

It seems to me that the clericalist attitude that priests and bishops are beyond reproach is actually quite dangerous. The idea has a pietistic veneer, and those who hold it may be sincere, but do they realize that attitudes like that contributed to the mentality that allowed the priestly abuse scandals to stay under the radar for so long?

Do they realize that Catholics have an obligation to lead others to the truth and away from error?

On my way to the rally the other day I popped on the radio. I admit I'm a religion nerd, and American denominational issues and religious trends are of a particular interest to me. I have no idea why. In any case, that is just to say that I put on the protestant radio station that is generally affiliated with Calvary Chapel, a denomination with whom my workplace shares a parking lot. In any case, this man David Jeremiah, the pastor of a megachurch in Southern California called Shadow Mountain Community Church, was on. The show was called, "Turning Point." Normally I would have changed the station right away because eight times out of ten, I'm not interested in what's on that station. But this time what he was talking about caught my ear.


Mr. (Dr.) Jeremiah posed the following question (I paraphrase): "Why do people in a stadium of 60,000 not feel lonely, but in a church (with far fewer people), they feel isolated and out-of-place?" The "profound" answer he came to (Mr. Jeremiah's sarcasm, not mine) was "tailgate parties." He said (paraphrasing again), "When do you ever see a single individual going into a game? Not too often. Usually you see people going in groups of 2, 3, 5 or more."

His point was twofold:
 
1. People often like to be among be crowds and large events because it makes them feel as if they're part of something important. In that big building, there's something important going on, and by virtue of my attendance and participation there, that makes me important too.

2. The "tailgate party" is just as important as the game. A tailgate party is made up of a smaller group of people and affords an opportunity to bond and have fun together. It's a place where "everybody knows your name." (As I recall, he used this phrase.)



So far as I can tell, this David Jeremiah is a pretty smart guy. A little too smart, actually. His reasoning is flawless...when it comes to a marketing rationale and apology for his self-described megachurch.** But there was really no religious content at all, other than that God designed us to be known and to have our voices recognized. Now doesn't that feel good?



Needless to say, everything about this approach to religion was "me-centered" and had more to do with social and personal psychology and emotionalism than with God and the nature of the Church. Big  events make me feel good because I feel as if I'm witnessing something important. Then, so I have an interpersonally sense of fulfilled I participate in a small group at my church. Certainly we do not have to go all the way to southern California to see examples of this model of church. It seems to me that our own bishop is promoting it, as a matter of fact. Gloucester County Community Church in Wahington Township,  St. John the Evangelist in Naples (FL), and St. Joseph in Richardson (TX) all have significant aspects of this model in common, and all have been recommended by Bishop Galante.*

I do not mean to be overly dismissive here. I'm not saying that one cannot actually have positive experiences in, well, in just about any Christian religious context. God can get to us even when there's the slightest crack in the door because He is God, He made us, He knows us, and He want us to love Him as much as He loves us. Certainly we can experience God's presence and learn about God outside of the Catholic Church--it's just that other Christian communities fall short of the whole Truth.

The problem with this particular church model is that religion is not about feelings and worship isn't about what "we" get out of it. Religion is, ultimately, about God and worship is about how we can best give glory to God in a manner befitting His Majesty. He is the King of the universe and should be the King of our hearts, and anything that falls short of what he deserves cheapens the gift. You don't come to a birthday party and hand somebody a gift still in the plastic bag. (Well, actually, that's happened to me before, and that's ok!) Yes, it's the thought that counts and just the act of showing up or bringing a gift is important and there is something to be said for that. But when it comes to the Creator and Sustainer of all things, I hope to bring him a gift that not only is nice underneath all the wrappings, but also looks nice, too. Why? Because He's God. He made us, and seeing even our tiniest little efforts to love and glorify Him, allows His love to grow in us. "You know well enough that Our Lord does not look so much at the greatness of our actions, nor even at their difficulty, but at the love at which we do them." (St. Therese of the Child Jesus)

So after listening to the "Turning Point" broadcast I actually felt sorry for the protestant megachurchers because as a Catholic, I know that it really has nothing to do with how many people are in attendance, even though of course it would be nice if the whole world believed in Christ and the Truths contained in His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Christ himself said that "where two or three are gathered in my name, there I am in the midst of you."* We do not need to be among huge crowds of people in an immense structure with jumbotrons, a band, great lighting and sound systems, and all the other drama that accompanies christian "edutainment."

We read in Matthew 26:26, John 6:51-72, and elsewhere He gave us Himself in the Holy Eucharist, so no matter how many are present at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, he is still there. Yes, we are a part of something very important when we assist at Mass, but the Mass is still the Mass and God is still God whether there are two or 2,000. We, like the Apostles, are to be fishers of men, and certainly we need to evangelize. But we must never lose sight of the fact that even if there were no one at all in the church during Mass, God still--literally--offers Himself to us. I've heard a particular priest say a couple of times that if on the holy altar of God Christ actually appeared to us in his full splendor and majesty, as He appears in Heaven among the throngs of angels and saints, we would fall down on our faces and drag ourselves up the aisle. I could not agree more. Truly something important is going on in a Catholic church no matter how many happen to be there.

So let them have their "tailgate parties" at the church called "Shadow Mountain" and others like it. The churches so many of us are blessed to attend here in South Jersey may be small, but in them the King of the Universe is enthroned. It is our privilege to be in His midst. (In fact, "level of energy" is like Christmas every day...only not in a mall. Like in a church.)

The biggest problem is that in our contemporary society, people place demands on their churches as if the church should conform to their lifestyle (book a Caribbean cruise with David Jeremiah here). But we know that this is not what Christ expects of us. He asks each of us to be willing to forsake our families and everything we have to follow Him. That's a tall order. He wants us to offer our sufferings in union with His on the cross. We are to conform ourselves to the cross of Christ. Carmelites have a cross with no corpus because they are expected to place themselves upon it in their daily sacrifices.

I thank You, O my God! For all the graces You have granted me, especially the grace of making me pass through the crucible of suffering. It is with joy I shall contemplate You on the Last Day carrying the scepter of Your Cross. Since You deigned to give me a share in this very precious Cross, I hope in heaven to resemble You and to see shining in my glorified body the sacred stigmata of Your Passion. (St. Therese of the Child Jesus, 19th century
Carmelite nun and saint)

Needless to say, we ought not to go to church expecting entertainment, expecting to be comfortable. It is so sad that some become impatient when the sermon runs a little long or the Mass goes over 45 minutes, and after holy communion make a mad dash for the exit before the priest--who represents Christ himself--processes. The traditional Mass--the dignified and holy worship of God--has been called the most beautiful thing this side of Heaven. So I for one would not feel comfortable attending a church in which one could expect the Rockettes to emerge, legs kicking wildly, from stage right.

7/15/08 Update: Relevant link to newspaper article click here. Priests must submit reassignment preferences by July 15th. "However, Andrew Walton, a spokesman for the diocese, said that priests were only being asked to express preferences for assignment." Boy that's the understatement of the year. Our inside sources inform us that a significant number of priests have not bothered to apply for reassignment or even requested to review the parish profiles. We presume this is because they fully realize that the reassignments are a done deal. In fact, we just learned of three additional priests in the past two days who have already been assigned outside the diocese, and the priest reassignments have not even been announced yet.

Save the Priesthood

by Chris, A Mater Ecclesiae Parishioner

When you see a priest, you should say, "There is he who made me a child of God, and opened Heaven to me by holy Baptism; he who purified me after I had sinned; who gives nourishment to my soul." At the sight of a church tower, you may say, "What is there in that place?" "The Body of Our Lord. " "Why is He there?" "Because a priest has been there, and has said holy Mass."

                                                     -St. John Vianney

In the Catholic Church, our religious vocations are the lifeblood that sustains us.  The Camden Diocese is imploding under a modernist agenda that is pushing "lay leadership" on the faithful.  Accept this now for what it is; the blind leading the blind. 

We have slumbered for too many generations in the Church.  We have given and received bad catechesis, we have rebelled against God given revelation and the teaching of the Church.  We have failed ourselves and our children with our contented ignorance.  It is our materialism that has pacified us, and the cost of this comfortably numb state is nothing less than our souls. 

Make no mistake about it.  We are living in, as Dietrich von Hildebrand aptly named it, a devastated vineyard.  The fruitful vineyard of the Lord, that for so many centuries and through so many persecutions and trials that has borne so much fruit, is a withered branch.  Our children leave the church after their confirmation, and are only there so their parents can throw a party for the occasion.  This cultural Catholocism is one who feels no obligation to either accept or reject the teachings of the church as a whole. And why should they, when they are neither taught these things, or that their soul's destiny hangs in the balance of whether they choose to live the Catholic life, or merely a pharisaical version of that life. 

We move toward empty shells, dressed up as adult daycare.  There is a constant drift towards the lowest common denominator, instead of pushing ourselves and each other (as a communion of saints should) toward the highest and the eternal goal which is Heaven.  We have come to assume we will all go to Heaven and have become complacent.  We are more interested in "dialogue" than in truth.  This is a waste of time and usually money.  We have a problem with buying worthy vessels to hold the Blood of Our Lord, but we put much of our treasure into funding committees and workshops designed to distract and never actually come to the truth.

We should be praying as we begin any endeavor, but there is no prayer as our diocesan planning officials begin dismantling the churches and parish communities built by our parents, and grandparents or further back.  Dialogue purports that there is no absolute truth.  Our Lord tells us He is the Way, and the Truth.  Choose your side carefully.  You can flounder away under committee meetings, photo ops and other feel good nonsense, or you can guide your life by the same lamp post that has for generations made men and women better themselves by forgetting themselves and conforming their hearts to Christ's.

Our lay leaders dialogue while the faith is dying.  We are perishing.  Our children stand very little chance in this world without a sense that they can choose a Catholic Church that stands apart from the world, and in most cases in opposition to it, or one that tries to dance with the Devil and make peace with him.  There is no in between. 

I went through a CCD program and observed as it failed my generation miserably.  I fell away from the Church for a time, and when I returned, I noticed that though I had come back I had no peers.  They had left, and had not returned.  Pope John Paul II tells us in Catechesi Tradendae that catechesis is a sacred duty and a right of all the faithful. If we teach error, we have to account for that. It is not our opinion that we teach, but the Faith and how to live it.  It is the right of our children and we are failing. The laity has been in charge of this since my generation, and they have failed miserably. That is why our children are leaving the church in droves. That is why even adults not only don't know the faith, but act with apathy towards it. The designers constantly pander to what their notion of "hip" is (which is usually very outdated) or what they think will bring youth back to the church.  Keep in mind that whatever watered down version of current pop culture they dress up in church clothes, kids will see it as just that, and much less entertaining than what they can actually get with their pop culture.  Entertainment is not religion, nor is excitement religion.  Each year, a new trend arises from the sewage of pop culture, and we are trying to find ways to integrate that into our churches.  By the time it is integrated, it is already outdated.  From the tambourine and guitar bands of the 70's, to the praise and worship bands of today, we look to the world instead of just simply looking to our Catholic Heritage.  Remember G.K. Chesteron's words:

which saves a man from the degrading slavery of being a child of his age.  

True, joyful and undiluted Catholicism is for all time, and in the bosom of this Church can we work out our salvation with fear and trembling.  We need our priests to shepherd us.  Who would want to give their lives as a priest in the new "vision" of the church that is being put before us?  Perhaps that is a goal of this agenda.  Discourage vocations by emasculating and removing everything from the priesthood leaving it solely as a sacramental function. 

Without our convents and monasteries, we have few holy examples, few modern living saints to guide us, to pray for us or to sacrifice for us.  Indeed, these notions are largely ignored in the modern church.  When I see a religious habit, I see behind it the power of God, where these days I see religious and see only the power suit. 

We need to pray for holy men and women to lead us out of this spiritual desert.  And we not only need to pray for good and holy priests, but we need to rise up now and defend them.  We have precious few in this diocese, and we are watching as 21 of them at the writing of this piece are being sent into exile, forced into retirement or what have you.  Yet if the priest shortage was the concern, would we not need to keep these priests?  It must follow that they are being persecuted.  I know as a Knight of Columbus that I took an oath to defend the priesthood, which I intended to do with my own life were it ever necessary.  This is a time that I call on all knights of the diocese to rise up and defend their priests.  Their vocations are being destroyed, their priesthood taken away from them, and their spiritual fatherhood disintegrated before our very eyes.  If you do nothing now, you are not living up to your oath, and you will find yourself in a church devoid of the presence of Our Lord and in the middle of a lot of hand clapping and emptiness. 

Not to oppose error is to approve it; and not to defend truth is to suppress it; and indeed to neglect to confound evil men, when we can do it, is no less a sin than to encourage them. -Pope Saint Felix III

We are entering a dark time, and it will require men and women of virtue, courage and strength.  We must rise to meet the challenges of our time, and defend our faith.  Now, the priesthood needs our defense.  Support your priests, and accept nothing less than priests.  Pray and fast for them and for new vocations. 

When the bell calls you to church, if you were asked, "Where are you going?" you might answer, "I am going to feed my soul." If someone were to ask you, pointing to the tabernacle, "What is that golden door?" "That is our storehouse, where the true Food of our souls is kept." "Who has the key? Who lays in the provisions? Who makes ready the feast, and who serves the table?" "The priest." "And what is the Food?" "The precious Body and Blood of Our Lord." O God! O God! how Thou hast loved us! See the power of the priest; out of a piece of bread the word of a priest makes a God. It is more than creating the world. . . . Someone said, "Does Saint Philomena, then, obey the Cure of Ars?" Indeed, she may well obey him, since God obeys him. -St. John Vianney

So can we live without our priests?  Can we do without the Mass?  Perhaps as we should, we can place the blame on ourselves.  It is God's justice which brings chastisement into our lives, and it is always just.

St. John Eudes said:

The most evident mark of God's anger, and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world, is manifest when he permits His people to fall into the hands of clergy who are more in name than in deed, preists who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. 

We have many good priests who are being persecuted, and there are those who are going along with the plan to dismantle our lives and replace it with something entirely different.  If you do not resist, you will find yourself guided by the person that until then sat next to you in the pew, but that thinks highly enough of their place to lead the congregation in a desolate liturgy that is not the sacrifice of Calvary we need to sustain us.  This is not the Church, and will not be the Church when they implement it. Consider the final message of Akita from Our Lady:

The work of the devil will infiltrate even the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate Me will be scorned and opposed by their conferees...churches and altars sacked, the Church will be full of those who accept compromise and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord. The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of My sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them.

If you don't see the writing on the wall, or the work that goes against the church your eyes are closed and you are still sleeping.   The following prophecy was given by Our Lady to Ven. Sister Marrianne de Jesus Torres in the 16^th century!

The sacred Sacrament of Holy Orders will be ridiculed, oppressed and despised, for in doing this, one scorns and defiles the Church of God, and even God himself, represented by his priests.  The Demon will try to persecute the Ministers of the Lord in every possible way, and he will labor with cruel and subtle astuteness to deviate them from the spirit of their vocation, corrupting many of them.  These corrupted priests who will thus scandalize the Christian people, will incite the hatred of the bad Christians and the enemies of the Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church to fall upon all the priests.  This apparent triumph of Satan will bring enormous sufferings to the good pastors of the Church, to the great majority of good priests, and to the Supreme Pastor and Vicar of Christ on earth, who will shed secret and bitter tears in the presence of his God and Lord, beseeching light, sanctity and perfection for all the Clergy of the world, of which he is the King and Father.  Moreover, in these unhappy times there will be unbridled luxury which, acting thus to snare the rest into sin, will conquer innumerable frivolous souls who will lose themselves.  Innocence will almost no longer be found in children, nor modesty in women, and in this supreme moment of need of the Church, those whom it behooves to speak will fall silent.

This is for our time.  Our Lady told Sr. Marianne that it was a prophecy for the 20^th century, and the scandals we have endured have done this.  We need our good and holy priests to be an example.  They are trying to put two married ex-protestants on the fast track to the priesthood at present, and they are trying to replace the priesthood with the laity.  And our priests who have given up their lives in service to Our Lord and to us are suffering and they have no one to defend them.  If you are Catholic you are called to defend your priests now.  Accept no model of "newchurch" that has anyone other than a priest pastoring to you.  Offer words of encouragement and support to your priests, as well as your prayers and your fasting.  Storm Heaven with your prayers and fasting now to stop the decimation of the faith in our diocese. 

by Father Romanowski

Note: This is a piece that was printed in the Catholic Star Herald quite a long time ago! Kept in his scrapbook amid clippings of football and baseball heroes, Our Fr. Romanowski gave this to me to reprint on the website. I apologize that it's taken me too long to put it up. As my kids are now in bed (finally) I have the chance to retype the article now.


Santa Helena de Goias, Brazil--When I have problems, I let a combination of prayer and imagination straighten things out. Starting out as a missionary in Brazil presents some problems.

I think a person with a particular problem in a particular field ought to ask an expert in that field about it. If I wanted to know something about defense, I would ask Robert McNamara. If I wanted to buy a nice side of beef, I would ask an expert on sides of beef--a housewife.

I asked St. Paul about being a missionary.

He looked tough! He was very squat, but had a hard looking body like a stevedore.

What a face! Character was chiseled into it: a little bald, homely, to say the least, but the face had the appearance of a man who had seen what we all want to see. He looked like a marine--a soldier of Christ, but what ascetical eyes in contrast, peacefully piercing, wild and restless. They looked like they could light up the whole universe. And I thought to myself--the face of Burt Lancaster with the eyes of Bishop Sheen.

It was funny how comfortable I felt with him. The same way I feel after reading one of his letters. It's not a comfort that makes you want to relax, but to act.

Father R.: If you were a missionary today, St. Paul, how would your work differ from the work in your own day?

St. Paul: The physical hardships of living were far greater in my day. For example, I had to do many miles of roadwork on foot to arrive at many of my destinations. The food was poorer. Force was supplied by animal or human automation. We used up a lot of time in just existing. Today, however, the missionary ought to encounter (aren't they using that word a lot lately) countless more individuals than in my day.

Father. R.: Then you would say there is a great difference in the two?

St. Paul: No, certainly not. The real force of one's life never changes. Christ was then, still is and always will be, the center of a missionary's life. The differences were accidental. IT's how much the missionary loves his work. That's what is important.

Father R.: What gave you the constant zest to do so much for Christ?

St. Paul: There were days when I didn't have that great desire to serve that I had on other days. But I reminded myself then, that it was Paul who was running things and not Christ. The thrill of Damascus kept these days from popping up too often, but they did come. When I realized this I had to change places and put Christ back where He belonged. Then I knew what it meant when I said it was Christ Who Lived in me. By myself I was entirely incapable of keeping the pace that I did. Only by asking for the necessary help from Christ could I sustain the grind.

Father. R.: Here in Santa Helena there seems so much to do. Where would you begin?

St. Paul: First, I would begin with the things I mentioned before--letting Christ have the central place in my life, and then I would let charity be the navigator of the course. Remember, this is the one virtue that can find the ultimate in life, the complete offering of oneself for Christ.

My time-honored remarks about this virtue can be applied to your work here. It's patient, this charity, when you have problems with the language. But keep plugging, plugging at those sermons and instructions, listening and reading. It's kind, when you want to leave a person who needs help with a well worn line or two, instead of taking the time to understand the problems. [Note: I suspect there's a typo in that last line, but I retyped it as it was from the CSH.]

Charity is not envious of the talents of others--learn from them who have been here longer, who know the problems better, who know the language better, who have sweated longer than you, built churches and opened up schools. Learn from the [ones] who have started a program for the poor, brought back hundreds to practicing religion and helped the whole city. This is evident in your new home of Santa Helena.

Remember the one about being puffed up. You might say that I boasted at times about my sufferings, my Roman citizenship, my religious background, my call and my preaching but I always did it for a purpose other than extolling my own virtues.

I gladly boasted about my weakness too, for the same purpose--to extol Christ. And in the same breath, charity does not pretend to be what it is not. I always knew I was a zero on my own. Just look what I did before my jolt from above. Left to myself, I would always have done the same.

Our Lord put it so well when He answered the rich young man. "Why do you call me good, only Christ is good." But this never let me sit in the corner contemplating how bad I was. On the other hand it made me think of how wonderful Our Lord was to allow us to dive into the ocean of goodness and to saturate ourselves in it in order to magnify the real goodness of God.

To me life was always retreating form what you call phoniness and advancing toward reality. That's what made me bear all things, believe all things, hope all things, and endure all things for the sake of Christ. Whatever happened to me I made it benefit the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, the life of God with us. If you have this attitude, then the work will follow through.

Be interested all the time, in every place and in every way to show Christ to the people. Like the good householder, use new things and old. I had to be imaginative--dealing with so many different types of people. I couldn't use the same methods with the Corinthians as I did with the Ephesians--different types altogether. Yet, the old proven methods, letter writing and person-to-person contact held me in good stead.

Father. R.: Brilliantly spoken. I certainly admire your talents.

St. Paul: Yes, I know you admire my talents, just a shade below those of John Callison, I believe.

Father R.: You are certainly up on things. You even know that. But with all due respect, you never hit 30 home runs against that tough National League pitching.

St. Paul: Yes, you know, we receive the destructions as well as the prayers. And in regard to that last remark, I never struck out over 100 times a season, either.

I always liked to keep up with things. You never can tell how a knowledge of a thing will help you attract a different segment of people to Christ.

For example, I used my knowledge of the Jewish and Roman law to attract these people. Both admired a man for this knowledge. My ability to work with my hands as a tentmaker attracted the tradesmen. My knowledge of athletics attracted the sports-minded. In a race, all run to win. We race toward God, all of us. We should all have the same attitude--to win that race.

Father R.: I'm worried about a couple of things, a couple of defects I have as a missionary. First, there's all this driving that has to be done over those bad roads and secondly, there's my inability to help the poor as I want.

St. Paul: Your driving ability will improve with time. Until then, and really always, we'll get you where you have to go. I traveled the rough trail myself many times, but always made my destination.

Your real problem is to sustain that love for others that only Christ can instill in our hearts, that strong, manly, forceful and aggressive love of others that creates action for Christ.

Ideas on the poor can be summed up like this--help them, coax them, plead with them to help themselves. Restore that dignity of accomplishment to them by allowing them to earn a livelihood for themselves. This means you're going to have to start an ambitious program. People will laugh at you. They'll say it won't work, you don't have the time. It'll work. Pray unceasingly for its accomplishment. Work like a one-armed pizza twirler. Never get discouraged.

Father. R.: There's nothing left to ask. Thanks, St. Paul.

St. Paul: The pleasure was mine, believe me. I really enjoyed spreading the Good News during my tenure on earth. I think I mentioned that in my letter to the Philippians. I had a difficult time choosing what I wanted more--to continue the work or to be with Christ permanently. I can now do both.

Say, I have to be going. I've another appointment with another fellow who has a tougher assignment than you. He's a special kind of missioner--a chaplain in Vietnam.

The bishop is now admitting to wanting to change the culture of the Church. What we are facing as the faithful is an attempt to change the fundamental nature of the Church, the Church as we know it, and how it functions, particularly on a local level. We must fight this--moreover we are obligated to by virtue of our baptism. It is a matter of our eternal destiny and the loss of many souls.

Snippet:

Over the next year, South Jersey's Catholics will experience a wave of dramatic -- and sometimes traumatic -- change.

Those losses -- which some observers compare to a death in the family -- will be controversial casualties in an ongoing campaign by the Diocese of Camden.

The diocese -- faced with a worsening priest shortage, aging congregations and shifting demographics -- plans to slash its parishes from 124 to 66. And Camden Bishop Joseph Galante said surviving parishes will see a culture change, as they are revitalized with an influx of ministries and new members.

I have only skimmed the article, but the title looks promising. Please email me any commentary you may have. I've been getting plenty of great contributions of late, so keep them coming.

Read it here

Notice so many spearheading the movement to save our Faith from immanent destruction are under 50, even under 40. Here's an article that explains why.

Here's a snippet (for more read the entire article below). Catholic leaders are saying that:

"Young people are leaving the Church in droves because of its refusal to conform to the times!" As a young person, I tell you this is rubbish.  It is a smokescreen.  I do not dispute that there are many young, "enlightened" Catholics who have left the Church with these reasons on their lips.  But they are using these reasons as excuses to mask the real problem:  They have either lost their faith or they never really had it.  The need in this case is not for accommodation, but for conversion.  These young Catholics have never been taught that Christianity is not about self-fulfillment, it's about self-denial; it's not about worldly power, it's about humility; it's not about control, it's about obedience; and it's not about some misguided, gender feminist idea of equality, it's about Truth.


I Was Robbed!
by Leila Miller     

I was robbed.

I am a "Generation X" Catholic, raised and catechized in the tumultuous aftermath of Vatican II.  I was a victim of "renewal" and experimentation gone awry, and so were my peers.  With great regret and without exaggeration, I contend that the results have been catastrophic for my generation.  It is my firm belief that the overwhelming majority of young Catholics don't have even an elemental understanding of their Faith.  As a direct result of that ignorance, young Catholics are leaving the Church in a steady stream (or, dare I say, tidal wave?).

It's not entirely accurate to say that I left the Catholic Church (though I considered it), but it's clear to me now that for most of my young adulthood, I was not in the Catholic Church.  Let me give you an overview of my upbringing, which will sound familiar to countless young Catholics.  I was born in the late 1960s into a believing and practicing Catholic family, and my sister and I were taught by our parents to love our Faith.  Barring illness, we attended Sunday Mass and holy days of obligation without exception.  We attended public schools, but we were enrolled in weekly CCD classes at our parish every year.

By the time I began religious education, memorizing the Baltimore Catechism was out, and feeling the "experience of Christ" was in.  My parish priest, I believe, could not have known how the new, more "enlightened" philosophy of catechism would affect the moral development of those in his charge; at the time, he was simply caught up in the so-called "spirit of Vatican II," and was being obedient to what were considered Vatican II "mandates."  Meanwhile, my parents, like the other parents, trusted that religious education classes would teach us the Faith.  Sadly, that never happened.

In general, the volunteer CCD teachers were good-hearted parishioners who probably tried their best with the vacuous material they were given.  Looking back, I can see that a couple of them must have been alarmed at the "new and improved" methods, and wanted to teach us the fundamentals of our Faith; for example, one year a teacher made us memorize the Ten Commandments; another year (9th or 10th grade, I believe) I heard the word transubstantiation for the first and last time.  Aside from these rare moments, I assure you that precious little substantive information was imparted to us youngsters; the countless hours I spent in religious education were missed opportunities.

I can tell you in three phrases the content of a decade of catechesis:  God is good, Jesus loves you, and love your neighbor.  (All very good and true, don't get me wrong, but if you read your Bible you'll see that that's only half the Gospel.  And sometimes half of the truth is more treacherous than an outright lie.)  We were shown a lot of cartoon slide shows depicting Jesus and his parables, and I have nice images of multiplying loaves, the Good Samaritan, and Jesus' empty tomb.  I don't remember anything particularly Catholic about the presentations, aside from a foray into the sacraments when it was time for First Communion or Confirmation.  (But if you'd have asked me to explain what a sacrament was, I couldn't have told you.)

We weren't taught any Catholic prayers, although we all knew the Our Father from Mass attendance, and in my case from nightly prayers.  I learned the Hail Mary along the way, but for many years I knew only the first half.  We never discussed the lives of the saints, or even mentioned their names for that matter.  (Sitting at Mass, I could never figure out who this "Paul" fellow was who wrote so many letters!)

I am thankful at least that I was born before the last vestiges of Catholic tradition could be stamped out, and in the 1970s some of the more pious and beautiful hymns were still often included in the Mass.  Songs like The Church's One Foundation, Immaculate Mary, and At That First Eucharist were powerful to a child, and they have stuck with me to this day.  The dramatic, colorful Bible story books I read at home also presented an unshakable image of a just and mighty God and his glorious and majestic Son.  These haunting melodies and images, combined with my parents' faith and the common themes of my religious education did instill some important truths in my heart:  I never wavered in my belief in God Almighty and in the Incarnation, Death and Resurrection of His Son.  Just who or what the Holy Spirit was or did was anybody's guess, although I did recognize that the Holy Spirit was one of the Persons of the Trinity -- whatever that meant.  (I believe this particular bit of knowledge came from the repetition of another traditional hymn, which spoke of "God in three Persons, Blessed Trinity."  Since traditional hymns are no longer sung on a regular basis, I can only surmise that young Catholics today are learning less than I did!)

I went through my school years believing I was a strong Catholic -- in fact, as I got older I would often identify myself as "devout" -- and after my high school graduation I chose to attend a Jesuit university, in part to increase my chances of meeting and marrying a nice Catholic man and raising children in a strong Catholic home.  I made many Catholic friends during my years at Boston College, many of whom were products of Catholic elementary and high schools and most of whom were, like me, practicing Catholics. Just touching on this subject brings up many difficult emotions in me, but it is hard to overstate the tragedy occurring at most Catholic universities across the country -- namely, the betrayal of  parents entrusting a child to a college that identifies itself as "Catholic" while it allows and even encourages fiercely anti-Catholic beliefs and practices to permeate the campus and poison impressionable minds.  I do not know one Catholic who grew in his or her Faith at B.C.  Indeed, many who entered Boston College as practicing Catholics graduated indifferent or hostile to Catholicism.  I assure you that Satan is having a good time at B.C. and universities like it.  Though modern sensibilities may scoff at this notion, I don't mean it metaphorically.

Anyway, to give you an idea what all of those years of religious training and formation amounted to, allow me to throw out a short list of terms that, for my first 28 years, had no meaning to me:

Sacred Tradition	Mass Cards	Scapular
Sanctifying Grace	Benediction	Pentecost
Magisterium	Act of Contrition	Four Marks of the Church
Sacramentals	The "Glory Be"	Joyful/Sorrowful/Glorious Mysteries
Corporal Works of Mercy	Apostolic Succession	Four Last Things
Indulgences	Perpetual Adoration	Spiritual Works of Mercy

In my experience, most Catholics of my generation are unable to explain or even recognize the above.  And to follow are some terms that may sound familiar to my post-Vatican II peers, but that they don't understand correctly and/or believe for a second:

Purgatory	Communion of Saints	Papal Infallibility
Transubstantiation	Mortal and Venial Sin	Immaculate Conception

The attitudes of my Catholic peers are no mystery.  Confession?  Sure, great sacrament -- I'll get there one of these years (wink, wink).  No pre-marital sex?  No artificial contraception?  Yeah right, get real!  Evangelize?  Are you kidding?  Why?  After all, Buddhism, Islam, New Age, Christianity -- they're all equal paths to God.  Who are Catholics to say they have the truth?  A mature spirituality requires the understanding that everyone can be right!

In general, Generation X Catholics don't feel any obligation to live as the Church teaches, and I promise you that they do not fear the fires of Hell, nor do they believe in Purgatory.  (But really, how could they?  They've gone to Mass faithfully for decades and never heard such topics discussed, much less defended!)

The culture we live in is merciless when it comes into contact with a poorly catechized Catholic.  American society today is designed to destroy one's faith, as objective truth and moral absolutes are rejected concepts.  When modern, "enlightened"
catechesis echoes the messages of the culture, and when those charged with informing the Catholic conscience and transmitting the Faith take an "experiential" rather than informative approach, what can you expect?  You can expect exactly what was taught.You can expect young Catholics who believe "conscience" means "opinion" and you can expect subjective feelings and personal experience to supplant objective truth.  In fact, the prevailing philosophy of my peers is that there is no one "truth" -- truth is whatever we want it to be.  You have your truth, I have mine.  (Kind of puts the lie to Christ's definitive statement, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" doesn't it?  It also doesn't sound like anything worth dying for -- those silly martyrs!)

We reap what we sow, and when pop-psychology all but replaces sound catechesis the results should not surprise anyone.  The practices and beliefs of my circle of Catholic friends tell a sad story.  Pre-marital sex?  Yes, with a series of different partners.  Contraception?  Of course -- it's a virtue.  Living together, a.k.a. living in sin?  It's a non-issue.  (One Catholic friend did go so far as to find a "compassionate" priest who consented to give her absolution before she moved in with a man!)  Active homosexuality?  A lifestyle choice.  Abortion?  Sad, and we don't like it, but it's a woman's private decision -- too bad her partner didn't use a condom.

Most of my Catholic friends attend Mass sporadically or not at all.  Some get their spiritual guidance from gender feminism (which is a fiercely anti-Catholic movement) and/or New Age philosophies. Overall, the Catholic call to holiness is an unfamiliar concept to them, and I do not for a moment attempt to exempt myself from this scrutiny.  Confession is a sacrament that was never emphasized (I made my first Confession at nine years of age while sitting on a priest's lap), and after my first couple of confessions during grade school, I never went back; I shudder when I think of how often I received Holy Communion unworthily.

So how is it that a Catholic who went to Mass every Sunday and went through all the proper catechism programs at her church could continue on unconcerned while carrying several serious sins on her soul?  I do not offer this as an excuse for doing wrong, but you must understand my actions in the context of what I was taught.  My generation of Catholics grew up with a keen understanding of God's infinite love for us.  We knew that His mercy could not be exhausted, no matter how badly we behaved.  But at the same time, we heard almost nothing about God's justice.  That while God is perfectly merciful, He is also perfectly just.  Somehow, that part was lost, or suppressed.  I guess no one wanted to hurt our feelings with Church teaching; for example, that by persisting in serious, unrepented sins, we could damn ourselves to an eternity in Hell.

Jesus said, "Enter through the narrow gate.  The gate that leads to damnation is wide, the road is clear, and many choose to travel it.  But how narrow is the gate that leads to life, how rough the road, and how few there are who find it!" (Matt 7:13-14)  Jesus mentions Hell over a dozen times in the Gospels, but our teachers and priests only presented us with the Jesus of the Beatitudes, or the Jesus who continuously forgave sinners.  We were never reminded that Jesus forgave repentant sinners, those with contrite hearts and the intention to sin no more.

The God presented to American Catholics today is the Rodney Dangerfield of gods:  He gets no respect.  Today, God hardly needs to be worshipped, since He's our buddy, our pal, our equal.  No need to fear Him or stand in awe, no difficult obligations on our part -- we need only feel the warm fuzzies He showers upon us, until we die and He takes us instantly to Heaven.

Such was the image that my generation got of God our Father.  But what would we say of any other father who asks no obedience, forgives every sin unconditionally and automatically, with no requirement for an apology or recompense?  We would call him a wimp, a pushover, a sap, a fool.  Good and loving parents don't reward bad behavior and disobedience.  They set down boundaries that a child, for his own good, must not cross.  Should that child choose to persist in disobedience and wrong-doing, good parents don't expand the boundaries to encompass his bad behavior, they hold firm and hope for his repentance precisely because they desire his happiness and success.  They do not cease to love him, even as they let him experience the consequences of his poor choices.  Such it is with God and sinful man.  He loves us infinitely, but He cannot force us to love and obey Him against our free will.  None of this was explained to post-Vatican II Catholics.

Although many of my peers will leave the Church and Christianity altogether, many will do as I did.  That is, I never once considered forsaking Christianity, nor did I question Christ's divinity (I felt strongly that to deny Christ would be blasphemous and a sacrilege).  But I was guilty of presumption.  I thought that because of my "deep faith" I could continue in one or another mortal sin and God would forgive me, or make an exception on my behalf.  I just knew he would respect my "conscience!"

I never did disagree with the Church's stand on controversial issues such as abortion or homosexuality.  I had even heard, almost by accident, some of the Church's arguments against artificial contraception, and they made sense to me.  I thought the Church was probably right on this issue (how magnanimous of me!), but of course I could never be expected to actually go along with this teaching!  I did plan to learn Natural Family Planning one day, sure, but certainly not now, in my young married years.  After all, God understands.

Though I presumed on God's mercy, I still believed in moral absolutes, and I never went the way of moral relativism; in fact, another young mother and I spent a year and a half writing an editorial column for our state's largest newspaper in which we rejected moral relativism and defended the concept of objective truth.  This friend, Kim, had spent six years as a gender feminist and New Ager, but motherhood combined with writing our column eventually led her back to Christianity and into a local Bible church.              (Read Kim's story here)

Kim had been a lapsed Episcopalian and I was a waning Catholic, so we had never really had religious discussions until then; but because of my strong belief in an objective right and wrong, I was attracted to what she was telling me about the Bible church.  These evangelicals stood firm on moral issues and were not afraid of offending anyone with Christian moral truths.  I couldn't say as much for the Catholic parish I was sporadically attending, where moral courage was sadly lacking and politically correct sermons and liturgies were the norm.  A Church that sought to blend in with the culture was not the kind of religious community I wanted.  I was raising children in a scary society, and I needed support from others who believed as I did and who would be a refuge from the "pagan world."  In my disgust with what American Catholicism had become, I flirted with the idea of leaving it for the Bible church.

Let me back up here and fill in some details.  Shortly after I graduated college, I became engaged to Dean Miller, a nice agnostic Jewish boy (so much for my attempts to find a Catholic husband!).  My identity as a Catholic was strong enough that I had come to this relationship with certain non-negotiables:  I would never get married outside the Church, and any children of mine would be baptized and raised Catholic.  Dean (who, ironically, attended a Catholic high school) respectfully and unselfishly agreed to my conditions, and we were married a year later in a Catholic church by my childhood priest.

Over the next four years, I gave birth to three beautiful babies.  As you might imagine, this provided me with any number of excuses for not going to Mass on Sundays, and almost never on holy days.  Of course, when one does not understand what takes place during the Mass, it is easy to become lax about attending.  During those years, I lived in two major cities and had done a bit of "church-hopping," trying to find a parish I liked.  I became disillusioned by the seemingly endless (and lame) attempts to make the Mass "hip" and entertaining.  All of the hand-holding, applauding, trite songs and political correctness was a monumental turn-off for me.  I felt no reverence, no awe; there was nothing in these Masses to snap me to attention, to take me out of myself and focus my mind and heart up to God in His Heaven.  I wasn't "getting anything out of it."  (Like so many others, I did not fully comprehend that one doesn't go to Mass to "get something out of it" -- one goes to worship God.)  When I did get myself to church, I felt as if I were "putting in my time," mechanically fulfilling an obligation.  I often ducked out right after Communion.

Because I was raised to never miss Mass, I felt guilty for skipping it so often (as well I should have, considering the gravity of the sin!).  I half-teasingly blamed Dean for my not getting to church, but he wouldn't let me get away with such scapegoating.  He and I knew I had no one but myself to blame.  Though my actions were inexcusable, allow me once again to explain my state of mind during these years.  I had grown up in a culture that had, with amazing rapidity and nonchalance, thrown all of the old value systems out the window.  Nothing was sure and eternal anymore, and it had gradually become unacceptable to believe in a right and wrong.  The idea of sin was deemed positively medieval, and  "morality" became a dirty word.  "Getting one's needs met" was the focus of each individual's personal growth, with the question being,  "What's best for me, and what makes me comfortable?"

Of course, Christ's message to the world is exactly the opposite.  We Christians must die to self, take up our crosses in suffering and sacrifice, and do the will of our Heavenly Father.  The Catholic Church in America seemed to me to have forgotten this message, and was all too eager to fit right in with the culture.  Instead of the Church going forth in courage to influence and change the world, the world was influencing the Church.  Worshipping and glorifying God seemed to take a back seat to worshipping and glorifying ourselves.  I knew enough about Christ's message to recognize that a serious gulf existed between what the Pope and the Bible were saying and what American Catholics were hearing.  At some point, the American Church and the world became almost indistinguishable in my eyes.

Case in point:  The only moral challenges given to the faithful from the pulpit were (and are) calls to help the poor, or admonitions against racism and sexism.  But it was obvious to me that every good atheist, pagan or non-believer out there was saying the same thing.  So why bother being a Christian?  Why get out of bed on Sunday morning and go to Mass when I could turn on any news program or TV series and get the same message?  Young Americans generally are sensitive to social justice issues, since we've been immersed in a culture that never ceases to speak out on such things.  To this day, when I hear yet another social justice homily, I want to yell out:  "We get it!  We get it!  But what we never hear about is the need for personal morality!  For repentance!  For conversion!  For holiness!  What we don't understand is our Faith!  Teach us!  Challenge us!  Help us get to Heaven!"  Have too many leaders of the Catholic Church in America forgotten that their mission is to save souls?

The abuses and trials one must endure at Mass today are legendary among the faithful, and it was just such instances which helped fuel my estrangement from the Church.  For example, I have been at Masses where I have been driven to distraction as I read the words of Sacred Scripture in a missalette while the lector read a distorted "inclusive language" version of the same text.  My intelligence has been insulted as I've witnessed the disappearance of words like "brothers" and "men" from both liturgy and song -- apparently the political correctness police have decided that I as a woman am either too stupid or too fragile to understand that such words include me, too.  I have sat through an Easter Mass where the priest donned a bunny suit for a homily/skit, and balloons were tied to the pews.  And I have sat with my mouth hanging open as I heard one priest use that morning's gospel reading to condone homosexuality.  After a while, it didn't seem worth it anymore; I could no longer see the point to attending Mass.  Looking back, it is clear that I had lost respect for the Catholic Church.

Which brings me back to my flirting with the idea of leaving for a Bible church.  I had listened to my friend Kim tell me about the powerful and courageous sermons she heard week after week at her non-denominational church.  The pastor spoke out against the immorality that surrounded Christians today.  He spoke of right and wrong, and he used Sacred Scripture to show his flock the proper way a Christian should conduct himself.  The evangelicals at this church did not pretend to blend into the culture, they were fighting against it, in a loving, Christ-centered way.  They kept their eyes on God.  And the faithful were actually instructed in Christianity!  Kim was attending Sunday services, weekly Bible study, a doctrine class and a Christian parenting class.  She loved it because her soul was being fed, and for the first time she understood what it meant to be a Christian!  What a contrast to what I was experiencing in my Catholic parish.  No wonder a good portion of her church's congregation consisted of ex-Catholics -- young ex-Catholics like me, who were raising families.

Maybe this is a good place to debunk a myth that desperately needs debunking.  One of the classic lines from liberal, dissenting Catholics is this:  "The Church needs to change its outdated teachings and must ordain women, replace the patriarchal language in the liturgy, allow divorce and remarriage, sanction birth control, masturbation, homosexuality, abortion [and so on, ad nauseum].  Young people are leaving the Church in droves because of its refusal to conform to the times!"

As a young person, I tell you this is rubbish.  It is a smokescreen.  I do not dispute that there are many young, "enlightened" Catholics who have left the Church with these reasons on their lips.  But they are using these reasons as excuses to mask the real problem:  They have either lost their faith or they never really had it.  The need in this case is not for accommodation, but for conversion.  These young Catholics have never been taught that Christianity is not about self-fulfillment, it's about self-denial; it's not about worldly power, it's about humility; it's not about control, it's about obedience; and it's not about some misguided, gender feminist idea of equality, it's about Truth.

But for all of the young Catholics who leave the Church because it is not politically correct enough for them, there are equal numbers (mainly those who have begun families) who are leaving for opposite reasons; namely, they feel the Church has become too liberal, too morally lax, too reflective of the secular culture.  These Catholics are filling the pews of fundamentalist and evangelical churches, whose leaders hold fast to Christian morality, and where the Ten Commandments are still understood to be commands, not suggestions.  These young adults are searching for an anchor in a world gone mad.  They are searching for Christ and a high standard of Christian morality, and they don't believe they can find either in the Catholic Church.  (Ironically, by leaving the Catholic Church, they are actually walking away from the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and leaving the faith that holds the highest and most difficult moral code of them all!)

I leaned toward a Bible church because of the moral courage I knew I would find there, because of the pride in Christ Jesus that so permeated the place, and because I would receive instruction in my faith, not an apology for it.  Yet if you ask a liberal, dissenting Catholic why Catholics are leaving the Church, they'll tell you it's because we haven't gone far enough in liberalizing the Faith!  It's as if they're saying, "Let's neutralize Christianity completely, ignore our heritage and traditions, throw out the sacraments, deny the existence of Original Sin, disclaim the divinity of Christ, drain the Faith of any truth or meaning, and then the churches will be bursting at the seams!"  It makes you wonder if the people so hell-bent on liberalizing the Catholic Church are acting out of love for the Faith or acting out of a desire to destroy it.

Nevertheless, by February of 1995, I just wanted out.  I was ready to send out a trial balloon to my mom, to see how she would react to my inclination to leave the Church.  I specifically did not approach my dad first, as I knew he would be heartbroken at the thought; but because my mother was raised a Protestant (she came into the Catholic Church when I was three), I thought she would be easier to talk to.  Mom is a very rational and stoic person, and she is known for giving sound advice.  After I popped the question:  "How would you feel if I left the Church for a Bible church?" she gave me the answer that would change not only my life, but the lives of many others as well.  She said, "Before you leave, you should find out what it is that you're leaving."

She then proceeded to give me some of the reasons she had left Protestantism.  For instance, she said it never made sense to her that Protestants place all their belief in the Bible alone.  The question for her became, which Bible?  There were so many different translations, and everyone had a different view on which version was authoritative.  She was also wary of non-denominational churches in general, and she talked about "the cult of the personality," or the tendency in such churches for the congregation to rally around a well-liked, dynamic pastor who usually had a new and "brilliant" interpretation of Scripture.  He would be the reason that they came, and if that particular pastor left, the congregation would leave with him.

Everything she said made sense to me, and that evening my thoughts of leaving Catholicism were at least neutralized.  The big blow came a couple of weeks later when my mom, in her matter-of-fact way, presented me with a book.  It was the kind of book I had never seen before.  The kind of book I never knew existed.  It was a book of Catholic apologetics.  It was Karl Keating's Catholicism and Fundamentalism .

Some people may roll their eyes in disbelief when I say that I never knew such a book existed.  I don't blame them -- even I cannot believe that it never occurred to me that someone out there might find it necessary, useful, even noble to defend the Faith!  It seems so silly to me now.  How could I have been ready to jump ship to a Bible church without even investigating the doctrinal issues involved?  Why did it never even cross my mind that a Church of 2,000 years might be able to present an argument on her behalf?  Maybe it's because in my lifetime as a Catholic, I had never heard anyone defend the Faith.  No one had ever given me any reasons why Catholics were right, why we had the fullest truth.  The only thing approaching an apologetics argument was my parents' statements that ours was the oldest Christian church.  That we Catholics were here first!  During my childhood and adolescence, I remember being quite proud of that fact.  Too bad no one ever elaborated on that point.

But once that glorious book was placed in my hands, it was all over.  I was excited, amazed, impressed that someone had taken the time to spell out the differences between Protestants and Catholics, not mechanically and neutrally, but passionately and full of love for the Catholic Faith!  And Mr. Keating used the Bible itself to illustrate the truth of Catholic doctrine!  It only took reading a few pages of this wonderful book to not only keep me Catholic, but to set me on a path of knowledge that has led my soul to burn for the Faith.  Sound dramatic?  It is!  Thanks to two years of study and the grace of God, I have found treasures that I never dreamed possible in this world, and yet I have come to understand that I have only dipped my little toe into the vast and glorious ocean that is Catholicism.

Over the next several months, my friend Kim and I engaged in a series of friendly, but extremely intense, theological debates. We went back and forth about issues such as Papal authority, the Real Presence, Mary, sanctification of the soul, and the implications of the Inquisition.  We gave special attention to the two doctrines that separate Protestants and Catholics:  sola scriptura (the Reformers' belief that the Bible is a Christian's only authority) and sola fide (the Reformers' belief that we are saved by our faith alone).  At times it was like the blind leading the blind, but I used the best arguments for Catholicism I knew at the time, and Kim got a hold of the best apologetics that Protestantism had to offer.

The phone calls were intense, and they would leave us physically and emotionally drained.  A couple of our conversations lasted seven hours!  After about six months of this mini replay of the Reformation, we hit what we call "the brick wall" and we agreed it was time to stop talking about theology for awhile, as we were frustrated and getting nowhere.

Meanwhile, my husband Dean was being sucked into all this "God talk" whether he wanted to or not (I was so excited about what I was learning that I discussed it with him when he let me).  Together, Kim and I had "discovered" the Old Testament prophesies which so clearly vindicate Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah, and I excitedly pointed out these passages to my dear Jewish husband.  I'll never forget the almost panicked look in Dean's eyes when he reluctantly admitted one night that it appeared Jesus might actually be the Son of God.

In their own journeys to faith, both Dean and Kim had one overriding principle:  They were searching for objective truth.  They didn't make their faith decisions based on their own opinions or what "felt right."  They weren't looking for what was comfortable, they were looking for what was true.  And of course that's what God asks of each of us.  Just as the Savior took up His Cross, we are each expected to take up our own, following in the footsteps of Truth Himself, even if it costs us our comfort, our security, even our very lives.

In Kim's quest for Truth at all costs, she kept praying and studying, even after we hit our "brick wall."  She gave the Catholics one last chance to prove themselves by reading Patrick Madrid's now legendary book, Surprised By Truth , in which eleven converts -- many of them Protestant ministers -- give their reasons for becoming Catholic.  In three nights (she calls them the darkest nights of her life), she was shown the Biblical and historical truth of Catholicism.  Six months later, at great personal cost but with great joy, Kim did what was previously inconceivable to her:  She received the Sacraments of the Church, and is now a devout Catholic.  Within a year, and after an initial reluctance, her husband announced his own intention to convert.  And with great rejoicing and all gratitude to God, I can report my husband Dean's profound conversion as well.  (Yep, I got a Catholic husband after all, and a devout one at that!)

Some other fruits of my "conversion"?  I have returned to confession after more than fifteen years, and I now reap the graces of that wonderful, previously unknown sacrament.  Mass, which I once avoided, is now an other-worldly experience for me.  Contraception?  Gone, with great benefit to my marriage.  I continue to uncover the treasures of Christ's Church, and Kim and I now teach the Faith to others.  I guess you could say that in Catholicism I've found the secret of the universe, and nothing can compare to its majesty.

Which brings me back to a sadness.  How easily I could have lost it all!  How easily my friends and contemporaries have lost or could lose a Faith they never really understood.  Feel-good, inoffensive, nebulous psycho-babble catechesis doesn't provide an even minimal foundation of faith, and a faith built on such a weak and erroneous foundation could not withstand even the smallest challenge.  For proof of this, note that fundamentalist Christians have successfully pulled millions of Catholics out of the Church just by quoting a few Bible verses out of their proper context.  And at the other end of the spectrum, feminists and New Agers lure Generation Xers out of Catholicism simply by loudly and repeatedly applying snide labels to the Church, such as "patriarchal," "oppressive," "reactionary," "judgmental," "irrelevant," etc.  A poorly catechized Catholic is virtually helpless against these tactics.

So, just what did I learn on my own that I never learned in religious ed.?  Almost everything, but here are some of the biggies that shocked me:  I learned that after Christ's ascension into Heaven, He did not leave us floating out here alone on Earth with just a book to try to interpret individually until He comes again (and since the vast majority of humanity was and is illiterate, why would He?).  I learned that the Catholic Church is the one Church explicitly founded by Jesus Christ on the rock of Peter, the first pope, and that the Bible is a product of the Catholic Church (and thus subject to her interpretation).  I learned that as Christ promised, the Holy Spirit has been protecting and guiding the successors to Peter and the Apostles for all these 20 centuries.  I learned that, because of this promised guidance, the teaching authority of the Church cannot err when speaking on issues of faith and morals; the Church does not, has not and will not change such teachings because she cannot!  The deposit of faith has remained pure and intact since public revelation ended with the death of St. John, the last Apostle.  I learned that the Church has always rightly claimed to be the protector of Christ's Truth, with the authority to proclaim, explain and apply that revealed Truth to the world.  I learned that submission to Church teaching is submission to Christ.

I learned that the crown jewel of Christianity, the Eucharist, is clearly evident in the New Testament, and that it was brilliantly prefigured in the Old Testament by many different writers, thousands of years prior to Christ's institution of that sacrament.  It's no wonder, then, that the earliest Christians and all of the Church Fathers were staunch believers in the Real Presence, and were thoroughly Catholic in the rest of their doctrine.  The writings of the Fathers would stun any Protestant, and most Catholics as well!  I learned that the seven sacraments of the Church were explicitly instituted by Christ and are the direct channels of God's grace into our souls, the surest links between Heaven and Earth.  I learned that God did not make it difficult for man to find the Truth, provided that man seek the Truth.

The thing that shocked me most of all?  Everything I mentioned above can be proven biblically, historically, and through an exercise of reason.  Catholicism is not a religion of blind faith.  Kim and I have played devil's advocate for every controversial claim or issue regarding the Church, and the Church has won every time -- in fact, the Church's case gets stronger and more exquisitely beautiful every time it's tested!  Yet young Catholics were never told any of this.

As I said at the beginning:  I was robbed and my peers were robbed.  The loss is incalculable, as how do you count the cost of even a single lost soul?  As for blame, well, there's enough blame to go around, and I am fully aware of my own culpability in all of this.  I could have asked more questions, and I could have sought to do God's will as best I understood it, but in many cases I did not.  I have had long discussions with my parents, and they have willingly accepted their share of the blame as well.  But if I were giving a prize for biggest subverters of the Faith, it would have to go to liberal, dissenting Catholics, especially those in positions of power within the Church, be they theologians, bishops or catechetical directors.  They have witnessed an entire generation raised up in complete ignorance of the Faith as a result of catechetical failure, they see wide-scale rebellion and disdain for Church teaching and authority, and yet they still push to further liberalize the Church, pushing more and more people out of the Light and into darkness.

When I hear of dissident movements such as Call To Action and We Are Church, and when certain bishops, priests and sisters support and even lead these causes, I am indignant.  While these so-called "progressive" Catholics work to undermine the Faith and  fall all over themselves apologizing for the teachings of Holy Mother Church, I just wonder when any of them is going to apologize to me?  Or to my contemporaries?  When will they apologize for putting a  generation of souls in jeopardy?

Maybe they should be reminded of the Second Epistle of St. John, verses 9-11:  "Anyone who is so 'progressive' that he does not remain rooted in the teaching of Christ does not possess God, while anyone who remains rooted in the teaching possesses both the Father and the Son.  If anyone comes to you who does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house; do not even greet him, for whoever greets him shares in the evil he does."

Or how about St. Paul writing to the Galatians (1:8-9):  "For even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel not in accord with the one we delivered to you, let a curse be upon him!  I repeat what I have just said:  If anyone preaches a gospel to you other than the one you received, let a curse be upon him!"

Here are Jesus' words on the subject:  "Whosoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea" (Matt. 18:6)

Catholics -- be they priests, bishops, religious, theologians or laymen -- who do not profess loyalty to the Holy Father and the Magisterium should have the integrity to identify themselves as Protestants, for that is what they are, i.e. they exist in a state of protest against the Roman Catholic Church.  And those influential Catholics who have so obviously lost their faith have no business teaching or influencing the next generation.

I am not so naive or despairing to believe that even wide-scale apostasy among American Catholics at every level will destroy the Church.  We know from Christ Himself  that the gates of Hell shall never prevail against His Bride.  So even though we needn't be concerned with the Church's survival, we should all concern ourselves with the Church's primary mission on earth: the salvation of souls.  Too many souls have been allowed to slip out of the Church due to catechetical neglect, and it's time to stem the tide.

Perhaps the first step in reversing this trend is to throw ourselves at the mercy of God, begging forgiveness for the mess we've made in His Church and His world.  Second, we must pray for the conversion of those within our Church who seek to undermine the very Faith they claim to profess.  Third, each Catholic must take it upon himself to learn the Faith, and then commit himself to a life of proclaiming the Truth to others -- this is the "new evangelization" by the laity advocated by His Holiness Pope John Paul II.

Finally, I humbly propose a Catholics' Bill of Rights, to be handed out to every new Christian along with his baptismal candle.  Maybe it could go something like this:

You have a right to your Catholic heritage.  You have the right to hear the Truth, the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth.  You have the right to have the Faith of the Apostles transmitted to you unfiltered and undefiled.  You have the right to be catechized by an instructor who must first be required to profess his loyalty and obedience to Rome, and who humbly submits to all the teachings of Christ through His Church.  Anything less is not only nonsensical but scandalous, and might lead you away from the truth of the Church.  You have the right to expect Catholic orthodoxy in all Catholic classrooms and institutions, and you have the most blessed and merciful right never to hear radical feminism or pantheism taught as if it had anything remotely to do with Catholicism.  You have the right to remain Catholic.  If you give up that right, it will be your free will choice and not the result of poor or scandalous catechesis.  (In other words, you have the right to know what you're leaving before you leave it.)  And finally, you have the right to be indignant if you look back 28 years from now and realize that most of these rights have been denied you.

Praise God, my joy at having found the Faith is greater than my righteous anger at those who had a hand in keeping it from me for so long.  I know that I cherish my faith so dearly precisely because I almost lost it.  I know that God's ways are not man's ways, and I am forever grateful that He chose this way to lead me back home.  I only pray that He might somehow lead my contemporaries back home as well.


Leila and her husband have five beautiful children.
You may send her email at this address.
Leila@lisaslighthouse.org

Dear Bishop Galante,

Please be assured that we are praying for you as Christ taught us, even amid our anguish and distress at the prospect of our churches--in many cases the historic churches for which our ancestors toiled--being closed. We pray that you, the pastor of pastors, heed Christ's command that you be willing to lay down your life for your sheep, to keep always in your sight the welfare of the souls entrusted to your care. Yours is a great responsibility, and your flock is great.

We need our churches, and are especially attached to the historic churches and communities of our people. They are part of us and part of the way in which we approach our Lord. God created us as physical beings, and these special places are His way to our hearts. Churches are not generic for a reason: to some degree they are meant to reflect the particular spirituality and character of their communites and serve their needs.

What mystifies all of us, Bishop Galante, is the reason why these churches are being proposed to be closed. In the case of St. Mary's in Malaga, for example, there is no debt, it is financially secure, it has a holy and faithful priest, it has fostered vocations to the priesthood simply by virtue of its presence, it has a shrine and gardens that are lovingly cared for by its parishioners, it has a beautiful history, its attendance is as high as it has ever been (it's always been small),* and it is a powerhouse of prayer in a dark world. My goodness, I cannot think of a better church! It should be the last one a bishop would want to close. Why? Can you be honest and forthright in explaining to us how you propose to sell these properties in the current real estate climate and what, precisely, the money is earmarked for?

The faithful of the Diocese of Camden deserve to know what's really going on, what the motivation for all this is. We are to go forth and make disciples of all the nations. I feel certain the way NOT to make disciples this is to take away their churches. We plead with you, Bishop Galante, to communicate with us. Please pray that you do the will of God in all things. Please ask Our Lord to lead you along the right path. If you do, I am certain that you will not allow churches like St. Mary's to close. And throughout this difficult process, we will pray for you. In turn, please pray for us and that the Holy Ghost, especially in this upcoming season of Pentecost, will be with us and inspire us all to do the will of the Father.

May the Lord Bless You,
Julie Heiland

(Please feel free to add your signature to the letter, and comments/questions, by adding a comment below.)

*St. Mary's Malaga never even had a second Sunday mass until 1950. There were no weekday masses at St. Mary's until 1961, when it became an independent parish. Eighty-six years ago St. Mary's had only about 100 registered parishioners. It has many times that number now. Like so many other churches proposed for closure, St. Mary's hasn't shrunk: it's grown. We need St. Mary's now, more than ever!