The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) is a topic much spoken of today, especially in light of the impending Year of Faith announced by Pope Benedict XVI in his motu proprio Porta Fidei.
This pronouncement seems to have caused much excitement among the faithful. But for some, the excitement is tinged with a touch of trepidation because discussions on Vatican II often provoke anti-ecclesial rhetoric among certain circles of clerics and laity.
As I am a relatively new member of the Church, I know of a good number of people who might all too soon point out that my strong allegiance to the Pope and the Church can be attributed only to the fact that I am still too green in the Church for my views to be of any critical good.
It may naturally be construed that my argument for unflinching obedience to the Church, which is often accused of being uncritical and unintellectual, stems from nothing more than a lack of understanding of how things have worked out in the Church since the Second Vatican Council.
Or perhaps my case for obedience arises from the sheer zeal of being a new member of the Church.
To exercise the kind of obedience I propagate, “progressive” voices say, is to set the Church back to its pre-conciliar ways.
For these “progressive” voices, the Second Vatican Council represents absolute freedom, autonomy and a breaking away from the centralized modus operandi of the Church, often even to the extent of according to the Pope a role of mere ceremonial primacy: No more does he exercise supreme and universal authority over the Church. Rome, in this new economy, has become a nonessential entity.
Some have even resorted to accusing the Holy See of being “controlling,” “bullying” and “imperialistic.” Evidently, the Protestant Reformation of 1521 continues even within the Catholic Church itself today, and one wonders how far it will go.
The truth is, having been a Protestant for more than 20 years of my life and having spent a number of these years dabbling in what many have thought to be “progressive” ways of thought, I have experienced the impending bankruptcy of such absolute free thought.
It was the need for a sacred magisterium based on apostolic ministry in communion with the Successor of St. Peter that brought about my decision to be a member of the Holy Catholic Church.
As a former Protestant, I very well understand that one cannot be more Protestant than to seek the absolute self-accorded authority of private interpretation in all matters of faith and morals.
Furthermore, a rendition of Christianity that exalts unguided free inquiry — and I emphasize the word “unguided” — can be nothing more than an exercise of narcissistic intellectualism that enthrones self-reasoning above the age-old ecclesial enterprise of truth which employs the twin pillars of faith and reason.
You see, the notion of absolute free thought is a superfluous fallacy. We are all bound by some kind of ideology, whether or not we are honest enough to admit it.
If we do not subscribe to an authority above the self, then it simply means that one has appointed oneself as the absolute authority. No one is absolutely free; if we are not submitted to an external authority, then we are imprisoned within the confines of self-defined authority.
The irony lies in how self-appointed authoritarians often accuse the Church of dictatorship.
Of course, there might also be those who claim, “We obey God [or Scripture], but not necessarily the Church.”
This incongruent notion itself stems from a deficient construction of the nature of the Church and her relationship with the divine life of the Holy Trinity, which, in turn, is a result of enthroning oneself as the arbiter of reason.
Because of this, I will not venture to address questions such as: “Are there times when the Church may be wrong?” or “Were there not times when the Church had to retract its views on certain issues?” Such questions betray undue over-humanization of the Church and ignorance of its ontological nature of being not just human but also divine.
To misunderstand the foundational nature of the Church and her participation in the divine life of the Holy Trinity is inevitably non-Catholic, and this, in the era of the earlier Church councils, would have been unapologetically condemned as heresy.
Divine truth never changes, even though its pastoral implications may be misapplied and newly appropriated over time.
In addition to that, to attempt to engage such questions would soon lead independent inquirers to question even the infallible nature of the Church and the extraordinary infallibility of the Pope, both of which are essential ecclesial dogmas. Or has Vatican II opened the doors for even such issues to be subjectively debated without so much as posing an impact on one’s salvation?
Unfortunately, even many who consider themselves to be accomplished Catholic theologians have pandered to this error of defect.
Catholic teaching is akin to a stack of milk cans arranged like a pyramid on the supermarket floor. One primary dogma logically leads to several others, and those several others also have dogmatic implications on various other aspects of Catholic belief. This is called the “hierarchy of truth.”
When one unwittingly plucks out a can from the stack, the entire structure crumbles. This is often what happens when a self-appointed authority, rather than enforcing strongholds on the stack of cans, removes a can because of intellectual fashion and fancy, thinking this to be a newly granted concession arising from the Second Vatican Council.
Unfortunately, most people who are guilty of this action also lack the intellectual prowess to reconstruct an alternative hierarchy of truth in a consistent way because they fall short of the age-old wisdom possessed by the Church.
Those shrewd enough to avoid the Inquisition merely erode the entire theological enterprise into a series of socio-political creeds devoid of solid dogmatic foundations.
This brings us back to the upcoming Year of Faith. The Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, is not unaware of the state of faith among Catholics today.
If I read his intentions correctly, the Year of Faith is more than being about basic evangelization, in the sense of introducing the Catholic faith to those who do not know Christ.
It is also a call for all those who call themselves “Catholic” to return to orthodoxy of faith.
This is especially true when one keeps in mind that the Year of Faith is also expressly a commemoration of the opening of the much debated Second Vatican Council. The call to return to “faith” places the cause of the Council Fathers in proper light.
The fathers had never intended for the Council to be dogmatically pivotal in any way such that the Catholic faith be distorted or deconstructed in a way the earlier councils preceding it would hardly recognize.
Rather than employing a hermeneutic of rupture by applying erroneous principles of absolute independence unguided by sacred Tradition, the popes have been calling for the application of the hermeneutic of continuity.
In other words, Vatican II overturned nothing that had been solemnly defined by previous councils. If anything, it was an implementation of the desires of other councils preceding it.
The call of Vatican II was one of applying pastoral change to certain very crucial ecclesial practices, not one of “rectifying” timeless truth.
Unsurprisingly, this call for the hermeneutic of continuity has often been dismissed or ignored altogether by hearers who are characterized by self-defined agendas.
Pope Benedict XVI has gone even further to speak of a new kind of radicalism beyond that of radical ideology. It is a radicalism of obedience.
While few seem to be listening, fortunately, an ever-growing generation of younger clerics and laity are intently paying heed to his call. After all, Benedict XVI himself is no stranger to ideology.
He has found it to be a dead end — hence, his constant claim that the only way to an authentic renewal for the Church is through radical obedience. Ironically, “progressivism” is an ideology that is fossilized in the 1960s and the 1970s, despite having branded itself as being “progressive.”
To be truly progressive is to transcend the intellectual confusion arising soon after the Council (which stemmed from various misinterpretations of the Council Fathers’ intentions) and to move towards the timeless kerygma of the Church that is eternal in Christ.
It would be a gross misunderstanding to construe the Holy Father’s call as a summons to unreason and anti-intellectualism. From the early days of the Church, Church Fathers have often employed St. Anselm’s principle of fides quarens intellectum (faith seeking understanding) in their intellectual explorations.
This principle explicates the reality that human reason has intrinsic limits despite its potentials, and, when left unguided by divine revelation that is received in faith as its guiding source, intellectual adventures can and will go wrong.
One would have thought that 20th-century human history was enough to have demonstrated this reality. Seek to understand our faith we must, but not in open-ended ways that enthrone a right to establish our own conclusions on grave matters of faith and morals.
The thing about pendulums is that they swing. The post-conciliar children of the Church have a 50-year frame of reference to which we can refer, and we have seen the devastating effects of intellectual anarchy among clerics, religious and laity.
The pendulum now rests at the center, and this growing generation of younger Catholic clerics and laity recognizes that the only way forward is that of radical obedience.
Deacon Sherman Kuek is a moral and social theologian with the Diocese of Melaka-Johor in Malaysia.
Comments
Post a Comment
Thank you for expanding my thoughts of this issue. You have helped crystallize my perspective in a communicable, cogent manner. I will re-read and reflect on what you have written.
One layman’s observation: In very short order after the Council, discipline broke down. Look what happened to our nuns and sisters. Disaster.
Mass became theater and frequently still is theater. Many theologians became popes, overnight, with no repercussions.
Tradition was mocked. The Catholic college presidents and faculties surrendered to modernism.
Can this be denied?
Deacon Kuek sees through the nonsense and pretty words. Good for him. Good for Benedict XVI.
Thank you for this thoughtful reflection. I am a returning Catholic and consider myself one of the Pope’s biggest fans! I think that anyone who has spent any time in the Protestant Churches can perhaps see more clearly what a blessing our hierarchy is. I am happy for obedience to the Church now, and I pray all of the time that more Catholics will come to this awareness. 2 Chronicles 7:14 keeps coming to mind today…Oh if only we would humble ourselves and turn…God would heal our Land! We need more Catholics Leaders like you!
This is an excellent article. Many thanks for the cogent, clear presentation of the supreme importance of orthodoxy and obedience to the truth. Radical free thinking in the Church is not really the downfall of the Church itself, but surely is of those who practice it. I think of Hans Kung and his jealous opposition to B16 and the anti-authoritarianism he endorses. It is sad and pitiful to see the leaders of the LCWR carry on and wage a sort of war of defiance against the bishops, all the time putting their work with the poor in front of them as a shield. They know, and a lot of the rest of us know, that their anti-male, pro-gay, radical feminism and New Age proclivities are the real problem. They are like the first Eve who rejected God in favor of self-endorsement, bit the apple, and shared it around as a temptation to others. They are a scandal. So, too, theologians who give in to the temptation of intellectual narcissism and pander to progressive ideology by writing and promoting faux theologies that go against revelation and dogma. The Evil One is wringing his hands in satisfaction over duping these poor souls. Be alert, be aware, weigh everything, chose the good, the true, the beautiful. Fight the good fight and keep the faith. Cling to the Church. It is the barque of Peter in the modern storm. Pray for Benedict. He is God’s gift of grace to us all.
This article is “spot on”. Great job. I’ve read Vatican II and find NONE of the claims to be true that the “progressives” in the church contianed within. For those who claim otherwise can only do so with what I call “logical schizophrenia”. Your milk can analogy does a great job of illustrating this. This is one major hurdle for Catholic “progressives” and protastant believers alike to mentally overcome, before the TRUTH will be understood by all whom believe in Christ.
Thank you Deacon Shermoan for such truth here and well put thoughts. After having been a Protestant for over 50 years, the safety I feel in the Catholic Church is nearly palpable to me. So many speak of the Magistgerium as being narrow-minded and archaic, where I thank God for them that I can love the Lord and serve Him and be obedient to those He has placed to watch over. I find great peace and, as I said, a sense of being safe, in the Catholic Church. No longer do I have to figure it all out by myself and adhere to , many times opposing views, of the various Protestant denominations. I’m so done with “self defined authority”. I am very thankful to be Catholic now and I choose to be obedient to the Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself.
Good point(s). I am definitely not of the pre-Conciliar covered wagons camp, but if this Year of Faith could simply achieve the cessation of any singing (/drum solos.. I jest only slightly) during Holy Communion, so that we might actually sense the personal Encounter spoken of by the Popes—an encounter (holy communion!) that we have come to live for and cannot persevere without in this present culture (and which would be a better Eucharistic witness than song for the young in age or faith in our midst), I would be so deeply grateful. It might just renew hearts enough to bring others to the church again to see (Him) for themselves.
This is a well written and extremely comforting article. This allows me new vocabulary, new light, new understanding, which previously, I always felt frustrated in my ability to properly express.
In contrast to the intellectual anarchy represented in the milk can pyramid analogy, I’m reminded of the Foucault Pendulum Clock regarding our Church:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB2SXLYwKkM
Consider this idea written in the Vatican II document Dignitates Humanae:
“Jesus never forced anyone to believe in Him and accept His message. Instead, He patiently invited and persuaded people through love and through His sacrifice on the cross.”
Let us all keep these words in mind when we discuss obedience. A person’s idea of obedience is fashioned in the environment in which he/she lives–in Malaysia where you live there is still a monarchy with a king while in the United States where your opinion is published in the Catholic Register people live in a representative democracy with a system of checks and balances which encourages people to consider all sides of a question & seek the truth before giving obedience.
Again from Dignitates Humanae: “Human beings, who are “endowed with reason and free will,” must seek the truth, adhere to it when they find it, and “direct their whole lives in accordance with the demands of truth.”
Loved your article and wish that more Priest and Deacons had your same attitude, plus some of your knowledge and understanding of obedience.
God Bless
Joseph
Vatican ll opened an era of conscience for Catholics and non-catholic alike. It was the first step to dissolve a wall between Christians and non-christians. A wall institutionalized by the Church itself. The current hierarchy including Pope Benedict XVl wish to rebuild this wall. The first sep was to iniate a change in Liturgy to re-estabish a line of unquestionable authority, blind allegiance. The next steps were to gather allies that think in this manner to bolster their positions. The first recruited were the orthrodox Anglicans, dissatified with their own Church. Then there was an outreach to the Lefebvrians, with their radical view of others. Both are to be allowed to carry on in their own orthrodox traditions within the Chuch. Yet at the same time any discussions of priest marrying, or gays worshipping as Catholics, or as any other avenue of Catholic conscience are quickly sidelined. A Bishop was forced to retired simply for saying that discussions should be opened for priest being allowed to marry. No the agenda is clear, it is an orthrodox, ultra-right wing agenda to rebuild total unquestionable authority and a rebuilding of the walls between the Catholic Church and other Christians and non-christians. Did Jesus build walls or did He dissolve them?
Hi Dear Folks,
Thank you for your analysis, Deacon Sherman. Much appreciated.
I would like to comment on one issue that still plagues our Dear Church; that is the confrontation being established between abortion of life and contraception of life. There are only two absolutes in this life…conception and natural death. In between these our lives are filled with countless issues that mesmerize our consciences to yield or escape from our ethical stances.
Simply put, the Church in her governance needs to disassociate her dogmatic stance of coupling contraception with abortion. Here, we mean only pre-conception contraception. The life, the married couple leads in their Sacramental state, needs to have accepted the order, or non thereof, of conceiving and bringing up precious Souls into being. Let me explain by means of important examples when having more children needs not to be and contraception is the order to follow…temporarily or for throughout their married lives.
1) A wife has had six pregnancies…blessed with four full term births, one very near term loss and one miss carriage. Medical consensus says no more. Who could this be? My Dearest Spouse!
2) The recently blessed covenant relationship of a Couple extends to a period of “lay missionary” activity in Africa where teaching and nursing are to play important endeavours. A blessed second son appears on the scene of Family. They need to ensure that the blessing of conception is temporarily curtailed, but not by “natural ?” planning, to ensure their missionary work is accomplished satisfactorily. Who could this be? Us!
3) A Couple decide that biological children will not be their focus after much reflection and prayerful periods in their young married lives. Why? Their blessed plan is to adopt at least three Souls whose life would be “none” without the support of this generous married Couple.
4) A Couple seek and are granted marriage in the Church. Their physical and/or mental disabilities will prevent them to have and support children. Sharing intimate physical moments, with contraception being present, is a need to be addressed.
I hope The National Catholic Register will print our assessment and maybe send us a copy of it by e-mail. Thank you.
Peace.
Cathy and Murray Morello
Radical Obedience?.....AMEN!!!!
Sherman: I appreciated reading your knowledgeable article, and I quite agree that discipline and obedience to the Magisterium are obviously missing links. You have been here long enough to firm;y grasp the truth, but after the council there are a lot of Catholics in name only that are still very confused. In the coming year of faith I suspect Pope Benedict XVI is trying to recover something lost after the council. I was a convert well before the Council, and it may be a pity that you were not. In the most important way, returning to those days would be a recovery of something we have now clearly lost. I don’t completely discount VCII, but there are obvious flaws that can’t be blamed on the Holy Spirit.
The Eucharist is the pillar of our faith. Before the council, every Catholic believed in the Real Presence, and they acted at Mass as though they really knew God was there. This is the most important thing we have lost after the council, Belief drastically dropped from virtual 100 percent to a scandalous estimated 25 percent, and a careful observer at Mass can easily confirm the accuracy of the estimate. I hope this is what Pope Benedict XVI hopes to recover with the “new” Missal and the year of faith. I only hope is not too late. This continues to cost me untold anguish for the council.
I really like that phrase, “radicalism of obedience.” Everybody in America somehow learns to think that they are individual and unique authorities on what and how to believe. Look at the leaders of the NCWR. They are like the first Eve who decided on validating exclusively her own subjectivity, bit down hard on the apple, and got busy passing it around to the gullible. We are so collapsed in on ourselves when our greatest freedom lies in self-transcendence. We should be suspicious of ourselves, of our unknown sins, and praise God that he saw fit to bestow on us the kindness of divine revelation, the Gospel of Christ, the dogma and teaching authority of the Church. Without these we just mill around like cattle, susceptible to anyone who promises us any sort of faux isms that might help us make some sense out of life. We don’t need to go there when we’ve got what we’ve got in the Catholic Church. Fight the good fight and keep the faith! Remember:
THE GAME IS FIXED. THE LAMB WILL WIN. BE THERE.
Excellent article!
Here’s a robust argument just published by ‘guest blogger’, Ray Stamper, over at Called to Communion which supports this Catholic view of authority:
http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/06/the-catholic-and-protestant-authority-paradigms-compared/
Truth of the Catholic Church is universal.Founded by God,it sustains itself by the power of the Holy Spirit against all heresies .May the lord prosper good men like you to stand up to the heresies and defeat them by God’s will… God bless you.
Encourage everyone to read the “CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition”.
“ The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved ... and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium. I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion. “ – Pope John Paul II. (pg 5)
“….the Catechism has raised throughout the world, even among non-Christians, and confirms its purpose of being presented as a full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine, enabling everyone to know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives, and prays in her daily life.” – Pope John Paul II (pg xiv)
Thank you, Deacon Sherman. This is a very well thought out piece. You and I, having been in the Protestant Faith, have looked at the issues from both sides…and for me, faced multiple ‘protests’ (church-hopping) in order to find the Truth (The Church). My full-circle travels brought me back to Rome, but with great zeal and enthusiasm. Having been a Cradle Catholic who strayed during the late 1960’s (NOTE THE DATE!), to finally be ‘home’ is finding the Pearl of Greatest Price! I only wish that our Catholic Brothers and Sisters, who long for liberal interpretations of faith, would learn from some of us who saw the errors first-hand.
All Catholics should read the “CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition” to accurately evangelize without error, or promote heresy, schism, relativism and secularism.
Reading the CCC is requested in Pope Benedict’s “Porta Fidei”.
The CCC should have a prominent place on each Diocese web site, and Catholic Parish web site.
Obedience is required.
“ The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved ... and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium. I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion. “ – Pope John Paul II. (pg 5)
“….the Catechism has raised throughout the world, even among non-Christians, and confirms its purpose of being presented as a full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine, enabling everyone to know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives, and prays in her daily life.” – Pope John Paul II (pg xiv)
;)
Again, Great article!
...“A RENDITION OF CHRISTIANITY THAT EXALTS UNGUIDED FREE INQUIRY — and I EMPHASIZE THE WORD “UNGUIDED” — can be nothing more than an exercise of narcissistic intellectualism that enthrones self-reasoning above the age-old ecclesial enterprise of truth”...
This is interesting to read, and to watch unfold- looks as if you Catholics are planning to return to the age of, ‘you can’t understand God’s Word- the “Holy Father” and his priests are the ones who will explain it to you…”
IF exalting “unguided free inquiry” is “narcissistic”- what would exalting one man’s interpretation of The Word of God be? Would it not be worship of the one mane?
Let’s not judge with human judgment (or reasoning)- “but judge righteous judgment”, as Jesus commanded… That is judge with God’s judgment (which is written down for all to see).
The problem you face is one of NOT placing your trust in The True “Holy Father” and His True Word (The Bible). When you decide that The Power of God (The Holy Spirit; Jesus Christ glorified- see Jn. 7:39) IS The Guide (as Jesus Himself said it would be- see Jn. 16:13), AND when you decide to place your complete faith and trust in THE WORD of God to mean what it says and say what it means- see 2 Thes. 2:13 and 1 Cor. 4:6)- it is THEN that you will truly be ‘A Christian’... Otherwise, you are still “in bondage to” the whims of each and every man (including first and foremost, YOURSELF)...The reasoning of man is foolishness to God- see 1 Cor. 1:17-31… You are still in bondage to a man and his “infallibility” when you trust in “The Pope”—therein lies all manner of Anti-(against)-Christ doctrinal stances (please read your Bible and you will see).
It is a time to stand on “The Truth”- and The Truth is The Word of God, not any one man’s ideas…
“The Pope” HAS ‘nullified’ God’s Laws (See Matt. 5:17-20)...
The Catholic leaders have placed themselves above God’s Word as the authority in creating doctrine ever since the 1st Council of Nicaea, under Emperor Constantine, and have fully exercised themselves in it since… “The seven Churches of Asia” (see Rev.1-3)had ALREADY fallen away from what Paul and The Apostles had taught (repentance from “sin”- ie.- “transgression of The Law”, while holding to Faith in Jesus)...This was just as Paul said it would happen after his death (see Act 20:29-31; 2 Tim. 4:2-5)...
And now, sinful man (those who practice disobedience to God’s Law- see ALL OF Exodus 20—yes, including the “Sevent Day” “Sabbath”) has come so far down that road of “Faith WITHOUT WORKS” that he is in search again of WORKS TO DO (radical obedience to “the church”)! Only, again man fails, since as a “sinful” (UN-REPENTED from practicing disobedience to The Law) “man”- he will never “submit himself to The Law of God” for right and wrong in life… The unrepented man will only grow “from bad to worse” (as Paul said), and such is the case in what you see in the world of “Protestantism”—- as well as for WHAT YOU DO NOT SEE in the world of your own Catholicism—all are walking dead (as they are unrepented- and refuse to come to obey God through accepting Christ Jesus as their Sin offering and example of obedience)!
The solution to the problem is the one that “NO MAN” EVER TURNS TO!
The Bible.
Approach it WITH the proper mindset (see 1 Thes. 2:13 and 2 Thes.. 2:13)- the mind of true LOVE for God (see 1 John 5:3 “THIS is Love…”)- a mind of a Son who wishes TO OBEY what it is that the TRUE “Holy Father” has commanded all everywhere:
Acts 17:30 (KJV) “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to REPENT”
Romans 6:15 (KJV) “What then? SHALL WE SIN, because we are not under the law, but under grace? GOD FORBID.”
1 John 3:4 (KJV) “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for SIN IS THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW.”
Romans 13:9-10 (KJV) “For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and IF THERE BE ANY OTHER COMMANDMENT, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. [10] LOVE WORKETH NO ILL TO his neighbour: therefore LOVE IS THE FULFILLING OF THE LAW.”
1 John 5:2-3 (KJV) “BY THIS we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, AND KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS.
[3] For THIS IS THE LOVE OF GOD, THAT WE KEEP HIS COMMANDMENTS: and his commandments are not grievous.
Matthew 5:17-20 (KJV)
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. [18] For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. [19] Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. [20] For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Hope this helps to set you toward the mark you are searching for… Look toward God, not “The Pope”, not Protestant ministers, but God, and HE WILL SAVE YOU from these great lies:
2 Thes. 2:3-12 (KJV) “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; [4] Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. [5] Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? [6] And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. [7] For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. [8] And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: [9] Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, [10] And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; BECAUSE THEY RECEIVED NOT THE LOVE OF THE TRUTH, THAT THEY MIGHT BE SAVED.
[11] And FOR THIS CAUSE God shall send them STRONG DELUSION, that they should believe A LIE: [12] That they all might be damned WHO BELIEVED NOT THE TRUTH, BUT HAD PLEASURE IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS.”
That a convert to Catholicism can so well explain the quandary the Church is in totally astounds me. Deacon Kuek so clearly grasps and explains what priests are inexplicably reluctant to preach from the pulpit. And they can; the Vatican is coming forth with a document on homiletics for bishops, priests and deacons. The discussion of sins and misimpressions that people in the pew have must be openly explained to the ignorant. There are two generations of improper catechized “Catholics” out there that really are interested in their religion. They simply need to be educated and have their questions answered - and have the need for obedience to Mother Church. Good job, Deacon Kuek!
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.