LETTERS
2001 LETTERS
December
November
October
September
July/August
June
May
April
March
February
January
ARTICLES
NEWS
ROAMIN' CATHOLIC
Contents © 2001
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
LETTERS
OCTOBER 2001
PASTORALLY DEFICIENT
Editor's Note: The following letter, dated July 30, was addressed to Rev. Michael J. McKiernan at the Marywood Center in the diocese of Orange by Kenneth Fisher of Concerned Roman Catholics of America.
I am in receipt of copies of several form reply letters which you addressed over several months to some concerned Catholics who had written to Bishop Tod D. Brown informing him that they were withdrawing their present and future Pastoral Services Appeal pledges because of his heterodox endorsement and recommendation of homosexual domestic partnerships to all priests of the diocese and, of late, to the faithful through the The Orange County Catholic.
Each of your reply letters contains the following statement: "I am also very disappointed that you would believe an article in a paper Los Angeles Lay Catholic Mission] that routinely slanderously [sic] attacks the local clergy, including the bishops.... I would hope that you would reconsider your decision to believe an article you read in The L.A. Lay Catholic Mission."
Your reply letters are pastorally deficient in not responding in any truthful and compassionate way to the legitimate concerns raised in the letters from the concerned Catholics. To your shame, your letters attempt to legitimize grave heterodoxy. Moreover, you have confused "slander" with "libel." Finally, I contend that your statement is another damnable falsehood, unseemly so, coming from a priest, and that you must have been aware that it had no basis in fact or law when you replied to each letter.
If you have factual information showing that my contention is untrue, I request that you provide same to me as soon as possible. At a minimum, you should identify all articles appearing in the Mission which you claim have routinely libeled (i.e., damaged by malicious, false, and defamatory written statements) local clergymen and bishops and state in detail each and every fact upon which you base and which supports your claim.
If you do not respond with appropriate factual information by this date, I will assume that such supporting facts do not exist for even one such article and that you have deliberately maligned the Mission and attempted to mislead faithful Catholics. Accordingly, C.R.C.O.A will include your shameful deception in its detailed report of the deadly heterodoxy that has been unleashed on vulnerable souls by Bishop Brown and Father Gerald Coleman with support from the beginning by Archbishop William Levada, pursuant to notice given in C.R.C.O.A.'s memorandum entitled, "Grave Scandal in Pastoral Care of Homosexuals in the Diocese of Orange," dated August 28, 2000, which was sent to all diocesan priests.
Moreover, I have learned that certain members of the chancery have spread far and wide the falsehood that Dr. Robert Lynch had acted unethically and has betrayed the confidence of Bishop Brown by giving to Mission contributor Charles Coulombe copies of private letters and memoranda which detailed Bishop Brown's heterodoxy involving homosexual domestic partnerships. I assure you that the C.R.C.O.A. report will expose far and wide this outrageous calumny.
Kenneth Fisher,
Founder and President,
Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Anaheim
THE MEANING OF CELIBACY
Regarding the Hernandez letter in the September Mission:
If you look carefully, you can find definitions to suit your fancy. "Syzygy," a word in the Millionaire TV show, means three objects in a row in one dictionary, and two objects in another. There seems to be a little more agreement regarding celibacy and chastity, as seen below.
Grolier Encyclopedia: "Celibacy is the practice of remaining unmarried and abstaining from sexual activity. It is practiced in some form in most religions, usually for reasons of asceticism. Celibacy is particularly associated with Roman Catholic priests, who are forbidden by canon law to marry. This requirement is distinct from the vow of chastity taken by monks and nuns, who choose a life of consecrated chastity and ratify their choice by vow."
Encarta Encyclopedia: "Celibacy, the state of being unmarried, with abstinence from sexual activity. Considered a form of asceticism, it has been practiced in many religious traditions: in ancient Judaism, by the Essenes; and in Buddhism, Jainism, and Hinduism, by the members of monastic groups."
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary, 10th Collegiate Edition derives the word from the Latin, coelebs -- unmarried. It gives a first meaning of "the state of not being married," and a second meaning of "abstention from sexual intercourse," and a variant, "abstention by vow from marriage."
The Oxford Dictionary, 1996 edition, defines CELIBATE: "committed to abstention from sexual relations and from marriage, esp. for religious reasons," with a second meaning of abstaining from sexual relations.
It is evident that all these consider abstinence from sexual relations as the main aspect of celibacy. If this were not true, priestly pederasts would be home free.
W.J. Mathey,
Nipomo
NOT THE WAY TO SPEND MY CONTRIBUTIONS
I was saddened to read that the Los Angeles archdiocese, the diocese of Orange and their insurance companies paid over $5 million to a young man who accused the former principal of Santa Margarita Catholic High School, Monsignor Michael Harris, of sexually molesting him when the man was a Santa Margarita student [see News, this issue]. I don't know if these accusations are true, but I do know that this is not how my Sunday parish contributions ought to be spent.
I also question the diocese of Orange's plan of spending $78 million on a new cathedral on a prime 15 acres of land by South Coast Plaza. Is this something Catholics of Orange want, or is this merely the desire of the diocesan bishop, Tod Brown? Considering that there are a few dozen capital campaigns occurring throughout the diocese at the parish level, I also question the timing of this decision.
I am most troubled by reports that Bishop Brown is spending $3 million in diocesan funds to renovate and enlarge his home in Orange, and still more to convert the gymnasium at the chancery into a grand bishop's office complete with fountain and courtyard.
This January, when Bishop Brown asks us Catholics to contribute to the annual Pastoral Services Appeal to support such projects, I might have to follow the example of many of his own chancery staff and just say, no.
John Thompson,
Anaheim
WHY NO CRUCIFIX
I have heard Monsignor Kevin give a talk about the new cathedral. At one point in his talk, he said that there would be a six foot cross up by the main altar, and not a crucifix. A person in the audience raised their hand and then asked the monsignor why he was not going to have a crucifix. Monsignor Kevin's answer was, "a crucifix would only scare the children."
To me, in saying this, Monsignor Kevin lost his credibility in anything he would ever speak about the new cathedral. Every Catholic child has grown up from infancy seeing crucifixes in their homes. They have kept on seeing crucifixes on all the countless times they were taken to church by their parents. Not to mention that every rosary has dangling from it the precious crucifix which, as a tiny child, they were allowed to handle, kiss and reverence.
I think I know why this monsignor would only have a cross instead of a crucifix. Back many years ago when my wife was a registered nurse working at Queen of Angels Hospital in Los Angeles, one afternoon, the nun in charge of my wife's floor at the hospital, rushed up to my wife and told her to go into a room that was empty and take the crucifix off the wall and take it out of the room. The nun told my wife that they would be admitting a wealthy, famous Protestant to that room. My wife, in telling me this, was deeply hurt and in tears for having had to do such a disgraceful thing as removing the crucifix.
I see the same scenario with Monsignor Kevin and the cross in the cathedral. A lot of wealthy Protestants donated money to the building of the cathedral. So, the monsignor does not want to offend the Protestants in any way. Monsignor Kevin, like the nun at the Queen of Angels Hospital, is saying, "take the crucifix out of the cathedral, so we won't offend the Protestants."
A theologian priest gave us a teaching on Good Friday a few years ago. The priest told us and pointed out that a cross is not the cause of our redemption and our salvation. The priest pointed out that before Jesus came, scoundrels, killers, and all sorts of bad people were crucified. So people were dying on crosses for punishments long before Jesus came on the scene. Yet not one of those crosses contributed to anyone's redemption or salvation.
So a cross by itself is not a symbol of our redemption. Our redemption occurred only because Jesus died for us, and it happened to be on a cross. If Jesus had been stoned to death, we all would have been totally redeemed because of it. So the crucifix is the only true sign and symbol of our redemption because it portrays Jesus dying on it for our redemption.
Not too many years after the incident at Queen of Angels Hospital, the hospital closed down. So, when you take Jesus out of the situation, the place will not survive. Jesus is the Rock, the corner stone. You take away the Rock, the corner stone, and you will not survive.
Joseph Falco
NO DOGMA, NO DOLLARS
Thank God for your newspaper and other lay Catholic publications which are faithful to the magisterium and expose falsehood and flakey, wishy-washy Catholics in name only, false prophets, wolves in sheep's clothing in the Church. I rejoice when I read their angry, name-calling letters which attack you for publishing the truth and for exposing their evil agendas.
Charles A. Coulombe's column, "Roamin' Catholic," is quite informative in exposing the liturgical abuses, stupidity and nonsense so common in countless parishes everywhere. Regardless of the countless directives from Rome, the liturgical pirates, rebel priests, nuns, etc., will continue to force on us their misguided agendas of gender benders lingo known as inclusive language. They will not mention the word "sin," they will not say the Nicene Creed, they will omit the confiteor, etc.
Things are so bad that Catholics will never know what they will find at any parish on Sundays. From dancing girls, to balloons, clowns, etc. At these parishes reverence, good sacred music, inspiring sermons are not to be found. Rather you will hear how wonderful all people are, that God loves everybody. No one goes to Hell. Catholic doctrine, need for repentance, sacrifice, dying to self, as far as these modernists are concerned, are no longer part of the Catholic terminology.
Isn't it interesting that these modern day experts cannot get people to fill the pews of their ugly churches? Jesus said it best: "by their fruits you shall know them."
Orthodox, faithful, loyal Catholics are called to pray for our beloved troubled Church and that the heretics be converted, lest they find out too late that hell is real and quite hot. Meanwhile, faithful Catholics who can no longer tolerate the foolishness and liturgical abuses forced on us, are encouraged to do the following: Find either a parish where a Tridentine Mass is offered, or discover the beauty and reverence of Divine Liturgy at eastern rite Catholic churches. Yes, it may mean that you have to travel many miles on Sundays. God is a God of peace and that peace of mind and soul is His gift to you to be found either at a Latin Mass, or Divine Liturgy. If you ever find yourself in San Luis Obispo on Sunday, join us for Divine Liturgy at Saint Anne's Byzantine Catholic Church, where reverence, beauty, incense, and inspiring sermons, along with a friendly and warm congregation is a foretaste of heaven.
Oh yes, one final thought. If your local parish masses have become a cheap show, rather than a place to worship, consider not going there nor contribute financially. It seems that even misguided liberals, liturgical pirates and the likes know the value of money. Remember, "no dogma, no dollars" convey this important message to them.
C.M. Santos,
Atascadero
NOT POLEMICS, BUT CONCILIATION
I had hoped that you would accept my letter as an honest attempt to promote a loving ecumenical dialogue with those within the Church who are "struggling." To overemphasize Catholic Orthodoxy as did the Jewish legalistic scholars about the Sabbath and its implications in Jesus' day is what I was trying to say was missing the point. Love should dominate -- NOT THE LAW! But sometimes I'm not always clear. I offer a portion of an ecumenical article piece that I wrote a few years ago that I hope more clearly outlines what I believe as a Catholic. Polemics is not my game. Conciliation is. Please take my response to your editor's note [see "Letters," September Mission] in that frame of mind.
"'...The Catholic Church has moved beyond its previous self-understanding...' as Richard P. McBrien said in 1978 Remaking the Church. In Crossing the Threshold of Hope, Pope John Paul II said that his Christianity has far greater significance than his being the Pope. The Pope writes therein that he seeks dialogue, not dictates. A very real change. While Christians are to bear witness to the truth, (see #2471 and #820 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church) the call to unity involves action to promote Christianity and these efforts must rely on the Trinity to transcend our humanity. Richard P. McBrien, in 1994, in his revised Catholicism, outlines numerous movements in the Christian community that show that 'Christians are trying'....
"Unity in love of God results in Unity in Truth. And truth is not always the most logical or intellectual conclusion. The only real unifier will be the Holy Spirit for Christianity....
"Another way we can show and exhibit love without sharing in our brother's mistake is to approach the problem with a desire to solve it, rather than with a desire to win. We all love to win. In fact, there is nobody who loves to win more than the theologian. The history of theology is all too often a long exhibition of a desire to win.
"But we should understand that what we are working for in the midst of our difference is a solution -- a solution that will give God the glory, that will be true to the Bible, but will exhibit the love of God simultaneously with this holiness. What is our attitude as we sit down to talk to our brother or as group meets with group to discuss differences? A desire to come out on top? To play one-ups-manship? If there is any desire for love whatsoever, every time we discuss a difference, we will desire a solution and not just that we can be proven right."
"'The world may not understand what the Christians are disagreeing about, but they will very quickly understand the difference of our differences from the world's differences if they see us having our differences in an open and observable love on a practical level.
"'But when they see differences among true Christians who also show an observable unity, this will open the way for them to consider the truth of Christianity and Christ's claim that the Father did send the Son.' (From an unpublished letter to Dom Bede Griffiths, O.S.B.)....
"And in Catholicism, slow in coming out of a fortress mentality, there clearly appears to be a transcendence, and certainly a most hopeful sign. In 1954, in Born Catholics, Pamela Carswell tells us so: "'The Church is, in Guardini's words, "the whole of reality, seen, valued and experienced by the entire man." She is the whole of reality because nothing that is, however trivial or dissonant or commonplace, however sublime or terrible, falls outside the Church. She is, of her nature, coextensive with all that is. And she is the whole of humanity, "the entire man;" there is no human type, no human thought or attitude or experience or emotion, which does not contribute to the Church's vision of reality. Lastly, the Church is a living organism; not an organized sum of constituent parts, but a living, organic whole, the "entire man," perceiving, judging, evaluating. This is not a fanciful theory about the Church, it is Catholic doctrine.' (She is not speaking of an institution or a political system).
"That reality is what has precipitated Ut Unum Sint and the gregariousness of the pope who seeks, not political power, but for all to grow closer to the 'source' and to become a more complete spiritual human being. Yes, there is a difference between Christian Ecumenism and that sought in the world at large. But, very clearly, there is also a common ground in an intellectual and visceral plane with all of mankind. And it is not spiritual, intellectual or emotional dishonesty to seek that common ground. And I believe such action initiated by Christians will speak volumes. For evangelization should never again result in power grabs, genocides, crusades, pogroms or persecutions. A Christian must, of necessity, follow the Christ of Gethsemane. It was there in the Kedron Valley at the foot of the Mount of Olives that the Christian learned that all who draw the sword will die by it. And this parable will speak volumes. For Christianity contains within it the paradox of the strength of God and the total selflessness of the Son of Man who is the paradigm exemplar for humanity. For Christianity can truly convert by its actions -- 'See how they love one another.' And isn't that what evangelization is all about?"
Thomas M. Whaling,
Lake Forest