LETTERS
1999 LETTERS
November
October
September
July/August
June
May
April
March
February
January
ARTICLES
NEWS
ROAMIN' CATHOLIC
Contents © 1999
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
LETTERS
JANUARY 1999
JEFF DIETRICH, FALSE PROPHET
Leaving aside the question of the tastefulness of the new cathedral's design, I am puzzled by Mr. Dietrich's words about cathedrals [see News, November 1998 Mission]. Dietrich tries to contrast "Catholic Tradition" and "the 5,000 year tradition of the Hebrew-Christian people" regarding the building of cathedrals. It seems obvious that Christians and Jews prize houses of worship-- sacred to present-day Jews is the Wailing Wall, a remnant of the temple, the concept of which dates back to King David, some 3,000 years ago. Jesus Christ, founder of the Catholic Church, called the temple "my Father's house," contradicting Dietrich, who, repeatedly claiming to be a "prophet," says: "And we humbly, but boldly, attempt to represent that prophetic vision that says that our God cannot be housed in a house of stone." The Catechism of the Catholic Church (paragraph 756) says: "...places of worship, built out of stones" are "praised by the Fathers."
Dietrich further claims that his "prophetic vision" is "the vision of Jesus," and that it is "in conflict with traditional Catholicism." Actually, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (paragraphs 66-67) says: "...no new public revelation is to be expected," and "so-called 'private' revelations... do not belong to the deposit of faith." The Catechism further says: "Christian faith cannot accept 'revelations' that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment."
The Catechism tells us (paragraph 1074): "The liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; it is also the font from which all her power flows." While the liturgy may be celebrated in the field as needed (e.g., by military chaplains, or in stadiums on papal visits), a substantial church keeps out the distractions of rain and snow. The Catechism (paragraph 2096) says: "Adoration is the first act of the virtue of religion." "Prophet" Dietrich tells us: "...any sacred tradition that calls for worship before we care for the poor is blasphemous."
Jesus has warned us (Mark 13:22): "False messiahs and false prophets will appear performing signs and wonders to mislead, if it were possible, even the chosen."
William J. Mathey, V.M.D., Ph.D.
Nipomo
A GRUDGING NOD TO DIETRICH
I hate to admit it, but Jeff Dietrich has a point. L.A.'s new cathedral has the architectural appeal of a warehouse, and the spiritual presence of a freeway underpass. And what about all the artifacts from St. Vibiana's that the cardinal promised would be incorporated into his new structure-- most notably, the sublime stained glass?
I feel a far greater 'spiritual reality' (I think I read such in an article in the Times) at the ruins of the great stone church at San Juan Capistrano than I ever could standing in the center of "Mahony's folly." What a truly awful waste.
Thomas Hogan
Long Beach
WHY DID CATHOLICS BLOW IT?
In the California November elections (Los Angeles Times, Portrait of the Electorate, November 5, 1998), while among non-Catholic Christians, 41percent voted for Davis and 51 percent for Lungren, and 41percent for Boxer and 56 percent for Fong; among Roman Catholics, 58 percent voted for Davis, 38 percent for Lungren, 54 percent for Boxer, and 42 percent for Fong.
The results drove me up the wall. Am I in the right congregation? Maybe some of your readers can explain the election results to me?
It is a tragedy, outrage, and scandal of the highest magnitude. Our bishops and priests have not woven into their pastoral ministry the life issues of abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, and assisted suicide. These are absolute evils. What is the albatross around the necks and thinking of the pastors?
The election is a wake-up call. But remember for the past nine months, the Lord gave us another wake-up call. That most shameful moral scandal in Washington, D.C. Who are we as a people? Are we a nation of laws and the Constitution? Should we quibble over the meaning of the words "is" and "alone"? Do we want to rewrite the ten commandments? Have we the moral fiber to remain a free people, not duped or in denial?
Actions speak louder than words. The Roman Catholic Christian voters in California blew it. On the other hand, the non-Catholic Christian voters didn't. Why?
George Kubeck
Stanton
Editor: the following responses were received in answer to a mailed solicitation to join Friends of the Mission:
TOO PAINFUL TO CRY
I have been getting the Mission for almost a year now. It is so funny to read! Your total lack of understanding of the Church is pathetic! And for you to state that you are respectful and objective is funny, too!
Now "60 Minutes" is not objective, either, but much more successful, informative, and effective than you will ever be! Even when the paper does bring up something of legitimate concern or interest, you have such a knee-jerk reaction to everything without thinking it through, or getting the other side. No, our Church is not perfect, and it could always use constructive criticism, which I have yet to see in your paper. Some of the opinions are quite saddening that I have to laugh, because it it too painful to cry.
So keep those papers coming. At least I am always interested in hearing and (at least trying) to understand someone else's opinion. However, I would suggest some basic Religion courses for many on your staff. It appears they have not had any instruction in 30 years.
Gary
GOOD FOR A LAUGH
You have your own agenda and you do not help the cause of the Church. I read to see who is on your "hit" list and help my parishioners by addressing your errors! It is also good for a laugh at times.
A Pastor
DISRESPECTFUL, FLIPPANT
I was happy to receive your letter asking for membership in Friends of the Mission because now I finally have a name and address to write regarding your publicaiton. When I received your unsolicited paper for the first time, I was naturally curious to read something new from someone claiming to be supporting the church. It did not take many issues to discover your particular "slant" of the news.
I found your paper to be malicious, slanderous, disrespectful, flippant, and most sadly, lacking a concept of Christian charity or honesty. You claim that "we have always tried to be respectful of legitimate Church authorities and to be objective in our reporting." First it seems that your interpretation of the work "legitimate" implies only of those people YOU approve, regardless as to if they are legitimately in office according to the canons of the church an the approval of the Holy See. It was almost humorous for you to say that you try to be objective; I would suggest that you try harder because you are not even close.
I have sent back the paper twice to the address printed on the front and asked to be removed from your mailing list, yet I continue to receive it. Now you have the audacity to ask for financial support. I will now ask that you please respect my wishes and have my name removed from your mailing list.
Rev. Thomas D. Schweitzer
Vernon
KEEP IT UP
Keep up your magnificent job!
Father Jim Melley, USN
Seal Beach
YOU CAPITALIZE ON THEIR FEARS
This miserable rag which has sent you into such fits of self-adulation has no journalistic integrity whatever. It engages in character assassination, tells half-truths, twists truth, takes things out of context to present them in the most unfavorable light, and proffers equally twisted apologies laced with innuendo and vitriol.
The hatred and contempt oozes from such wretched attempts at humor, such as "Roamin' Catholic." Words like "lectoress" and "cantoress" manifest your paranoia about women in the sanctuary.
Your appeal is to those who are afraid. You capitalize on their fears and prey on their ignorance. St. Paul in recent weekly readings denounced false prophets and those who would lead others astray. Too bad that you cannot see that you are tearing down the Church you profess to love.
While I heartily approve of healthy dissent, I detest the abuse of language, logic, and rhetoric that is your hallmark.
Since I really prefer to wrap the garbage in plastic grocery bags, please take me off your mailing list.
Sister Pauline Therese Daries, CSJ
Los Angeles
ROAMIN' CATHOLIC FAN
We cannot join Friends of the Mission but wish to continue our subscription. Keep up the good work. I especially enjoy the "Roamin' Catholic" series plus many other articles.
Charles Faulders
Camarillo
COME TO SEATTLE
Having heard some months ago of S.F. Faith, L.A. Mission, and News Notes, I sent several dollars for subscriptions. I did so in order to follow events occurring in our Church from the perspective of orthodox Roman Catholics. I am also on the mailing list of several "samizdat" newsletters for similar reasons. These publications (and several which are nation-wide) are important to me because we have nothing here in the Northwest standing in opposition to the dissenters and the destruction left in their wake. This area is a hotbed for radical religious feminism, theological comedy, and innovative liturgy.
I admire your dedication and sacrifice on behalf of our Church and pleased that your publications are expanding in circulation.
If your resources at some future date permit, please know that the territory of the Seattle Archdiocese offers extremely fertile ground for the expansion of your apostolate.
Don Butler
Seattle, Washington
EVER-ASTONISHING
You have honored me generously but undeservedly. I am just not qualified to become a friend of the L.A. Mission.
Though my affiliation is entirely secular, I am a born Jew, to begin with. You were not to know this, of course. My acute skepticism about formal religious beliefs and observances began with great doubt about official Judaism, especially in its appalling Orthodox excesses, and I have not, in 76 years, found any alternative creed to engage my support.
Clearly, since you have, with great liberality, published two letters of mine, written in acute exasperated response to items in you lively journal, you may have judged that I am a forceful doubter but buoyed by your own enviable faith, may also have considered that I am not beyond all hope of salvation. Hence, your inclusion of me in the mailing list.
I felt you merited this reply on your own fascinating but frequently contradictory merits, but it also gives me an opportunity to say that your feistiness in taking on the Catholic Establishment when its demeanor is even more fatuously rigid and unfeeling than usual, commands my respect in no small measure.
I hope this doesn't mean that you will discontinue sending me the paper since I look forward to discovering the ever-astonishing news of its concerns-- and, if I am moved to it, commenting on some aspects from time to time.
Norman Hudis
Woodland Hills