As Received - Our Readers

Now We've Got the Bomb
Readers share their opinions.

Hangin' ten for the Lord
Envoy magazine is, in the words of my 18-year-old surfer-dude kid, "The Bomb." Good work, guys and gals! Anybody who hasn't seen it should check out the [Envoy] Website. I go on Yahoo and put in "Envoy magazine." It's very good fer yer Catholic psyche.
Pete, via e-mail

The editor responds: Dude!

She can dig it
I love your magazine. We are very orthodox Byzantine Rite Catholics (yes, we really are Catholic — look it up in the Catechism, ref. #1203) who have always shielded our sons from the media: inappropriate TV and radio shows, computer games, books, toys . . . you name it. Your slick, hip, colorful look is great (scary drawings included). If parents don't want their children frightened (what child hasn't seen a drawing of the devil — he should look evil), there are other places than the coffee table to keep magazines. After all, this mag is geared to adults, not kiddies. As for flippancy, if we're too rigid and can't laugh at ourselves, we become boring and poor evangelists for the one true Faith. Who wants to approach a dreary, depressed Christian? (I especially liked your humor item on what to do with old Envoy issues). I know I'm putting this over rather strongly, but you got lambasted for being flashy. You folks at Envoy are very good at being serious when it's called for — spreading the Good News is serious business — but it's very nice to see the lighter side, as well. God bless you in your efforts.
Theresa Ferguson, Seattle, WA

It's fine by him
Regarding your recent "What Would You Do?" question about Young Life, I myself have been involved with Young Life for close to four years, and I have seen no type of stripping away of youths' [Catholic] Faith whatsoever. You can consider Young Life to be an ecumenical youth group that gathers all kinds of Christian brethren together to come to know Christ, and we also encourage them to seek the truth. Our goal and motto is to reach for the furthest person in the room who needs to hear what Christ has done. I am a true Catholic and proud of it, and one of my Young Life girls just got into the Church at Easter, so there is a time to share the Church, but that should also be the responsibility of the parent who needs to lead his child to holiness by means of the Church. Thanks for your time. I am praying for all of you. Keep doing a great job.
Dario Mobini, via e-mail

In defense of Young Life
Get thee to a confessional, Patrick Madrid! You rejected the work of the Holy Spirit when you rejected Young Life. I have been involved with Young Life for over 10 years, five of them as a leader in an inner-city school. Young Life has the allegedly dangerous, evangelical idea that kids should be told about Jesus Christ and His gospel, that they should commit their lives to Him and turn away from evil. How can this be dangerous to the Catholic Faith? Your logic that because some kids going to Young Life clubs or camps have stopped going to Mass, they should not go to Young Life, is like saying that kids should not go to college because that is the place where most young Catholics lose their Faith. Even a brief visit at a Young Life camp or club will quickly make it obvious that Young Life presents Theology 101. Mainline Christian denominations can easily stand together in this ministry. Even John Paul II invites ecumenical fellowship, why doesn't Patrick Madrid?

I thank God for the blessings of my association with Young Life. My own faith has been deepened by putting it into action doing front-line evangelization with lost kids, by learning to dialogue comfortably about tough faith issues and spending time in fellowship with Christians who walk their talk by answering the call of the Great Commission. Being around a Young Life leadership team is a lot like being around the early Church — lots of believers of different faith backgrounds. Young Life doesn't lead kids away from the Church. Just ask them. A lot of kids find Mass boring. Rather than reject a successful youth ministry like Young Life, we should be taking notes on how to reach kids with the gospel and make it stick. Upbeat music, engaging homilies and spirited worship are great starts to capture kids' hearts for Christ and His Church. Christ called us to unity, and that includes our youth ministries.
Jeff Russell, Folsom, CA

Patrick Madrid responds
No, I did not reject the work of the Holy Spirit when I recommended that Catholics steer clear of Young Life. I don't regard Young Life as a "work" of the Holy Spirit. Mr. Russell may disagree with my position, but the reasons he gives for doing so are, I believe, wrong headed and based on fuzzy thinking. There are better options available to Catholic parents for helping their children come to know and love Christ than sending them to Young Life. And besides, even though Young Life certainly has many positive aspects, as I pointed out in my comments [cf. What Would You Do? March/April 1998, page 37], Young Life groups are typically aggressively Evangelical Protestant and, not surprisingly, they inculcate in these young minds theological errors such as sola scriptura, defective understandings of salvation and religious indifferentism (ie. "Hey, Catholic, Protestant, whatever. It's all the same, as long as you love Jesus"). These facts pose risks to the Faith formation of young Catholics. Sorry, Mr. Russell, I respect your enthusiasm and desire for Christian unity, but I stand by my opinion.

The struggles of a revert
I recently reverted back to the Roman Catholic Church, not the American Catholic Church. The local church I came back to three years ago was and is very warm and inviting. It has many qualities that are seen in Evangelical Protestant churches. I liked that brand of Catholicism at that time, but now I know Catholics are different for a reason. In the last year, I have heard conversations in that church that said the Real Presence was not believed until the third century, abortion is okay in some cases, and that homosexuality is unavoidable and incurable. I was invited to a men's forum planning meeting and told by the RCIA director's husband that this church was founded on a liberal platform and my conservative views were not welcome. The only thing he knew about me was that I have a Bible study on a weekly basis at our house.

When I went to the priest to talk about these abnormalities, to ask about why people are ridiculed for kneeling during the consecration of the Eucharist, and to remind him about the Church teaching on using an unleavened rather than a leavened host, he gave me an article written by Joseph Rausch in America magazine. The writer spent a third of his time talking about the weirdness of some on the left side of the Church. The other two thirds of the article went on to view folks like Scott Hahn and pro-lifers as fanatics. Basically I felt the priest was telling me to take it or leave it, that this is the way the Catholic Church is in America.

What would Jesus do, and what should I do? That was the church that was there for me when I needed it, and my wife is in love with it and the folks. Most folks don't know what the Catholic Church teaches and why, so they love the church for its warm community. Most Catholics in America are so independent that they don't want to listen to anything that our "prime minister Father" has to tell us from Rome. So, should I stay and keep my wife happy and maybe have some influence in a hostile setting? Or should I go somewhere else to be around like-minded Catholics? The second choice tends to breed finger-pointing at the parish I would be rejecting, and that would not be very Christ-like.
Kevin E. Slattery, Bellbrook, Ohio

Who's real, who's not?
I just read Fiction Four (the one about the legendary Pope Joan) from your article "Pope Fiction," which appeared in the March/April 1998 edition. I have a question that came up as a result of reading your article: How can I distinguish between the fictional Pope Joan and other Catholic legends, like the existence of St. Christopher? I guess I'm looking for the thought process that governs the Church's view of people and human history. Any feedback on this subject would be appreciated. Thanks very much.
John McLean, via e-mail

Patrick Madrid responds
You raise an interesting and important issue, for which I thank you. First, let's remember that there are two major categories of legend: those that stem from some actual event or person, and those that are pure myth and have no basis in any actual event or person. Pope Joan belongs in the latter category. It can be shown, through historical means, that her legendary existence has no basis in fact. But the same cannot be said of St. Christopher. Francis Mershman wrote a cogent explanation of the St. Christopher "legend" way back in 1908 in The Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 3, pages 728-729. (Special thanks to the New Advent Web site for their electronic version of this article.) His remarks are worth quoting at length:

"St. Christopher (Greek: christos: Christ; pherein: to bear; Latin: Christophorus, ie. Christbearer), a martyr, probably of the third century. Although St. Christopher is one of the most popular saints in the East and in the West, almost nothing certain is known about his life or death. The legend says: A heathen king (in Canaan or Arabia), through the prayers of his wife to the Blessed Virgin, had a son, whom he called Offerus (Offro, Adokimus, or Reprebus) and dedicated to the gods Machmet and Apollo. Acquiring in time extraordinary size and strength, Offerus resolved to serve only the strongest and the bravest. He bound himself successively to a mighty king and to Satan, but he found both lacking in courage, the former dreading even the name of the devil, and the latter frightened by the sight of a cross at the roadside. For a time his search for a new master was in vain, but at last he found a hermit (Babylas?) who told him to offer his allegiance to Christ, instructed him in the Faith, and baptized him. Christopher, as he was now called, would not promise to do any fasting or praying, but willingly accepted the task of carrying people, for God's sake, across a raging stream. One day he was carrying a child who continually grew heavier, so that it seemed to him as if he had the whole world on his shoulders. The child, on inquiry, made himself known as the Creator and Redeemer of the world. To prove His statement, the Child ordered Christopher to fix his staff in the ground. The next morning it had grown into a palm-tree bearing fruit. The miracle converted many. This excited the rage of the king (prefect) of that region (Dagnus of Samos in Lycia?). Christopher was put into prison and, after many cruel torments, beheaded.

"The Greek legend may belong to the sixth century; about the middle of the ninth, we find it spread through France. Originally, St. Christopher was only a martyr, and as such is recorded in the old martyrologies. The simple form of the Greek and Latin passio soon gave way to more elaborate legends. We have the Latin edition in prose and verse of 983 by the subdeacon Walter of Speyer, 'Thesaurus anecdotorum novissimus' (Augsburg, 1721-23), II, 27-142, and Harster, 'Walter von Speyer' (1878). An edition of the 11th century is found in the Acta SS., and another in the 'Golden Legend' of Jacob de Voragin. The idea conveyed in the name, at first understood in the spiritual sense of bearing Christ in the heart, was in the 12th or 13th century taken in the realistic meaning and became the characteristic of the saint. The fact that he was frequently called a great martyr may have given rise to the story of his enormous size. The stream and the weight of the Child may have been intended to denote the trials and struggles of a soul taking upon itself the yoke of Christ in this world.

"The existence of a martyr St. Christopher cannot be denied, as was sufficiently shown by the Jesuit Nicholas Serarius, in his treatise on litanies, 'Litaneutici' (Cologne, 1609), and by Molanus in his history of sacred pictures, 'De picturis et imaginibus sacris' (Louvain, 1570). In a small church dedicated to the martyr St. Christopher, the body of St. Remigius of Reims was buried, 532 (Acta SS., 1 Oct., 161). St. Gregory the Great (d. 604) speaks of a monastery of St. Christopher (Epp., x., 33). The Mozarabic Breviary and Missal, ascribed to St. Isidore of Seville (d. 636), contains a special office in his honour . . . The oldest picture of the saint, in the monastery on Mount Sinai dates from the time of Justinian (A.D. 527-65)."

Another satisfied viewer
I'm enjoying your wonderful magazine. I am looking forward to "The God Squad" television show [At Ease, page 70, November 1997-February 1998 issue]. When does it start? Peter Kreeft is so darn good.
Mary Mongeon, Newmarket, RI

A canticle for O'Brien and Barley
I just want to register my amazement at how you've been able to produce the single most profound and disturbing visual meditation on a possible future that I have ever seen. With apparently meager materials, your artist, Michael Barley, has wrought a vision of, for lack of a better phrase, truly iconic power. I am referring to the article "Three Views of the Future," by Michael O'Brien in your November 1997-February 1998 Anniversary special issue.

The illustration for "Document One" made my skin crawl. Angst and loathing clotted my throat. That fear reserved for only the most menacing preternatural terrors tightened in my stomach. I could almost whiff the burn of chemical fire which the martyrs of Chicago might have endured in an acid crucifixion. There will be many, many taken unforeseen. How forlorn and forsaken they must have felt [ie. The "Martyrs of Chicago," whose fictional crucifixions were depicted on fold-out page 27] . . . before the burst of beatitude.

And it strikes me, as just a casual observer, that to create that graphical image is exactly one millimeter short of miraculous. Thank you. Michael O'Brien's powers of imagination and prosecraft are reminiscent of another excellent and frighteningly visionary author, Walter Miller, who wrote the book, A Canticle for Leibowitz.

On an unrelated, humorous note, I was going to join, but then I realized that, as a Catholic, I was already a member of the First Universal Apostolic Full-Gospel Assembly of the Nazarene (Unreformed).
Michael Vere, San Francisco, CA

Back with some questions
I am enjoying your magazine and am learning a great deal. I was raised a Catholic but got swayed by anti-Catholic literature and left the Catholic Church for 11 years, coming back in 1995. I have a friend who is Orthodox (Russian) and some brochures he gave me say the Catholic Church broke off from the "true" Orthodox Church. Is this right? I thought it was the other way around. Do you know of any literature I can pick up regarding the truth/errors of the Orthodox Church?

Also, even though I've been back in the Catholic Church, I'm still not convinced about purgatory. One more thing: I heard on the Mother Angelica show that we need Mary's approval to get into heaven. Is this true Catholic dogma? I couldn't find anything of the sort in the Catechism.
Denise Maslowski, Nanticoke, PA

Welcome back, Denise. Your friend is incorrect about the Orthodox Church being the true Church. As a point of fact, the Orthodox churches (there are several) broke from the papacy and the Catholic Church in 1054. Up until that time, the authority of the bishop of Rome was recognized by all — even the churches in the East. If you want proof of this to show your friend, pick up a copy of The Shepherd and the Rock, published by Our Sunday Visitor.

On the subject of purgatory, take a look at 1 Corinthians 3:10-17. It shows what happens to three individuals at the time of their judgment. The first man goes right to heaven and the third man goes straight to hell. The second man goes to heaven, but he undergoes purification first. Catholics call that purgatory.

Finally, you may have misunderstood what you heard on the radio, or at the very least, heard it out of context. We don't need Mary's approval to get into heaven. That has never been Catholic dogma. You were right to check it out in the Catechism. — Editor

A tongue lashing
As a Catholic charismatic, I was perplexed by Fr. Barbour's response to a question about speaking in tongues in the May/June issue. First, his interpretation of the Scriptural evidence doesn't "jive" with the facts. It seems there were two charisms of tongues known in the early Church. The first was that of Pentecost day when the foreign visitors in Jerusalem heard the Apostles speaking in their own languages. Acts 2:8 reads: "Then how does each of us hear them in his own native language?" (NAB) Verses 6 and 8 both imply that each visitor heard each Apostle speaking in the visitor's language. So, this gift seems to be that of a believer speaking a language that he never learned and everybody else being able to understand him. No need for interpretation of this "tongue"!

The second gift (which I have heard called a "prayer language" to distinguish it from the tongues of Acts 2) is that discussed by Paul in 1 Corinthians. This was a tongue used in private and communal worship. It is understood by neither the speaker nor by those around him. This is the gift commonly heard in the charismatic renewal. I don't have space here to tell of the power that resides in the use of this charism. Paul's tone of disapproval towards tongues in 1 Corinthians 14 has to be understood in context: the Corinthians were "out of control" in their worship service and Paul was attempting to control them. Note that he gives instruction for the use, not the discontinuation, of tongues in verses 26 and 27. For those who feel that present-day charismatic assemblies are not following the Scriptural directives, I would argue that those directives were specific to the Corinthian church. Which of us would consider Paul's instruction in verses 34 and 35 applicable today in our home churches?

Fr. Barbour has some negative anecdotes about "a famous writer and speaker in the renewal" and the Holy Father to corroborate his lack of enthusiasm for "emotional release" and "special charisms." Could it be that he misinterpreted them? Priests and leaders in the renewal sometimes vehemently encourage tongues, probably because they find such resistance to it. After all, it is a gift offered by God for the building up of the Church! And the consistent support of the popes for the renewal is documented in Open the Windows, edited by Fr. Killian McDonnell, available from Greenlawn Press, South Bend, Indiana.

The charismatic renewal and the charism of tongues are not so much emotional as they are experiential. And when people are experiencing the power and presence of the Holy Spirit, there is going to be some excitement. It is during charismatic praise and worship that I understand what it means to "love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind."

Finally, am I overreacting, or is the cartoon above the tongues question slightly less than flattering to charismatics? In any case, for those who might want the most recent official opinion on the charismatic renewal, I recommend Grace for the New Springtime, a 1987 statement by the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops. It's available from the Office of Publishing and Promotion Service at (202) 341-3098. I think that many Catholics will be surprised to find such unequivocal support for and encouragement of the charismatic renewal coming from our bishops.
Robert Dominick, Jackson, CA

Get happy! It's perk time!
The arrival of a new magazine is a "perk" time for me. With a sense of eagerness, I picked up my latest Envoy, May/June 1998. The eagerness accelerated when I spotted an article on speaking in tongues. I read it, but was disappointed.

It seems as if the author has squeezed the teaching in 1 Corinthians 12, 13, 14 and Romans 8 to fit into his own experiences. St. Paul does not minimize any gift, as the author does in this article, but he places them all in the context of "the more excellent way of love." The author seems to mesh praying in tongues and speaking in tongues into one concept. St. Paul does say in 1 Corinthians 14:5, "Now I should like all of you to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy."
Jan Janicke, Andover, MN

Music to our ears
My wife and I are relatively new Catholics, having been confirmed in the Easter season of 1997. I am now an RCIA table leader, and my wife is a sponsor. A few weeks ago, Mary (my wife) found your magazine on a magazine swap table at our public library, and decided I might like it. I do, and that's why I am subscribing. I'd like to make a few comments. The articles are great! The size of the page and type size are fantastic, too. I enjoy the fact that you include humor as well as seriousness. Your magazine reflects real life, and that's what it's all about — making our Faith an integral, living part of our lives. I'm glad my wife turned me onto you.

I'm anxiously awaiting my first issue (well, maybe not "anxiously," as anxiety is a sin). Thank you and keep up the good work. Your ministry is a real blessing.
Henry Bailey, somewhere in America