The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 7 of 12)

It is no secret that the pontiff wishes to re-establish ties with traditional Catholics, whose growing numbers are an embarrassment to the Church's hierarchy. As such, Pope Benedict XVI is to announce this week that "the Mass of Pope Pius V," a.k.a. the Latin Tridentine Mass, will now be permitted in each parish. Since this Mass was never forbidden by Vatican II, but only by individual bishops, this may come as an unwanted intrusion to those who believe that the Mass is a meal, not a sacrifice, that transubstantiation of the Eucharist is symbolic, and that people who attend Mass can dress in culottes, flip-flops, or plunging necklines. Whatever...

But along with the good news, there is the bad, and Judge touches, albeit tangentially, on what is the Achilles heel of the new Catechism: how will this "new" catechism be interpreted by those renegades who control "Catholic" universities, and large -- and small -- dioceses? Does Judge honestly believe that Cardinal McCarrick will enforce, "...the penalty of excommunication," for those politicians who support abortion regardless of what the catechism demands? Will those who, for 40 years, have twisted Catholic theology into a pretzel and made the Church another "meals on wheels" organization, pay the slightest attention to this "new teaching? Time will tell, but if the last 30 years is any indication, I suggest that Signor Judge not hold his breath.

I believe that a notable step may have been taken, but if the USCCB is permitted by the pontiff to stonewall and/or deflect the seriousness of the situation, then, like Ex Corde Ecclesia, the 1991 document of Pope John Paul II which sought to regularize what is taught in theology classes at Catholic universities, this catechism will also gather dust on the shelves. The ball is now in the papal court, and not to act is to consign the catechism and the Church to descend further from what Judge and I accept as the Gospel truth.

p>Pax tecum. br> -- Vincent Chiarello br> Reston, Virginia /p> p> For 40 years we have heard that the Baltimore Catechism was a poor teaching tool. Actually, even aside from its religious content, it was pedagogically excellent. The catechism laid down abstract principles. Our nuns (this was in the early 1950s, before nuns went batty) would then provide concrete examples. Learn the right first principles, apply them to real life situations. It's a powerful way to think. Of course the liberals had to do away with that catechism. They could not tolerate the first principles. And, at least when the nonsense started, they dared not offend parents by openly espousing false principles. So they taught by presenting kids with situations and then "guiding" them to the "right" answers. And now we have a couple of generations of Catholics who neither know their Faith nor think clearly. br> -- unsigned /p>

Another angle on the topic of heresy as raised by Mark Gauvreau Judge comes through The Random House Dictionary of the English Language. Roots of the word "heresy" in Greek and Latin are: the act of choosing; to choose; able to choose; that may be taken. It defines heresy for Catholics as "the willful and persistent rejection of any article of faith by a baptized member of the church." One might argue that the choosing aspect is highlighted in the "willful and persistent" part of the definition. And it's true that to be a formal, not just material, heretic, one must take a wrong position deliberately and refuse to give it up under warning. However, it seems more to the point to say that choosing is highlighted by the individual person's radically independent choice of a belief contrary to Church teaching (e.g., a belief that adapts to the times too much).

Thus, to be heretical, is to be pro-choice. In addition, to be pro-choice is to be heretical.

p>With the arrival of Passover, it's worth highlighting the orthodox position: solidarity of mind and will with God and the community. Out of the struggle with the Pharaoh and Egyptians, the passing over the Red Sea after the angel passed over their homes, and the journey through the desert, came the uniting of a dozen tribes into one nation, united in the covenant sealed by Moses and the Law proclaimed again by Joshua. Out of the struggle with the King and the English, including what historian David McCullough described as the miracle of Valley Forge and the crossing of the Delaware after Washington's reassuring vision of an angel, came the uniting of the 13 states -- former colonies -- into one nation, sealed in the covenant of the Declaration of Independence, purified in the wanderings of the Articles of Confederation, and solidified in the more unifying Constitution.

topics:
Taxes, Education, Health Care, Harry Reid, Bill Clinton, Social Security, Sports, Catholicism, Protestantism, Abortion, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Military, Iraq, NATO, Africa, Immigration, Energy, Oil, Medicare