LETTERS

Little Notes

Confessions
Talk About Movies
Roamin' Catholic
Follow Me




Contents © 1999
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.

May 1999 LETTERS

---

Re: Bart Brewer's talk, "Catholicism Exposes Catholicism" News Notes, March, Bart states that all the books he brought with him that evening "endorse what I am saying tonight about the Roman Catholic Religion." As an example he refers to St. Alphonsus de Liguori's book, The Glories of Mary, which tells us that "Mary is our salvation, Mary is our help, Mary is our Mediatrix...that is another Gospel."

It is a favorite ploy of heretics to take out of context traditional teachings of the Church and twist their meaning to serve their own heretical beliefs, then present it to the unlearned and attempt to persuade them it is the real truth.

The references to Mary which Bart says is another Gospel implies that Jesus Christ is not our mediator and our salvation. But St. Alphonsus makes it very clear that he teaches what the Church teaches, that Christ is the sole mediator of our salvation.

P-94 of St. Alphonsus' Glories of Mary states, "No one denies that Jesus Christ is the only mediator of Justice, that through His merits He obtained our reconciliation with God. But on the other hand, it is sinful to assert that God is not pleased to grant graces through the intercession of His saints, especially of Mary, His Mother, whom Jesus so much desired to be honored and loved.... There can be no doubt that, by the merits of Jesus, Mary was made the mediatress of our salvation. True she is not a mediatress of justice but of grace and intercession."

P-95, "Only those who lack faith can doubt that recourse to Mary's intercession is a holy and profitable thing." Mary's intercession is "not absolutely necessary, but morally necessary. Moreover, we say that this necessity arises from the very will of God, who wills that all graces He dispenses should pass through Mary's hands. This is St. Bernard's opinion which today can certainly be called THE COMMON OPINION OF THEOLOGIANS AND SCHOLARS."

P-96, "...mediation of justice by way of merit is one thing, and mediation of grace by way of prayer is another.... We admit freely that God is the source of every good and the absolute master of all graces. Also, that Mary is only a creature, who receives whatever she obtains (P-97), as a pure favor from God.... We most readily admit that Jesus Christ is the only mediator of Justice...because through His merits He obtained every grace and salvation for us. But we say the Mary is the mediatress of Grace. Whatever she obtains, of course, is gotten through the merits of Christ and that is why she asks and prays in His name. Nevertheless, every grace we seek is obtained through her prayer and intercession. "There is certainly nothing contrary to faith in this. Actually, it is quite in accord with the mind of Holy Church. She has approved many prayers in which we are taught continually to have recourse to Mary...health of the sick, refuge of sinners, help of Christians."

It would not be difficult to believe that this same distortion of truth may very well apply to the rest of "all these books" that Bart brought with him that night.

May the mantle of Our Blessed Mother always protect you.

Vincent Doonan Dempsey
Tampa, Florida

WAS THIS BART BREWER?

During the 1960 Election Campaign I read in my local paper, the Lynwood Press, Lynwood, CA, that an ex-Jesuit was going to give a campaign speech on Richard Nixon at Olivet Baptist Church in Lynwood. Well, I had to hear that one, so I went! Just graduating from Loyola University 3 years before (1956) I went to the speech prepared, even wearing my Loyola University jacket!

The speech was full of anti-Catholic nonsense, but this Protestant ex-Jesuit finished his speech with the words, "A VOTE FOR RICHARD NIXON IS A VOTE FOR JESUS CHRIST!" Could this have been Rev. Brewer? How weird!

Name Withheld

WORKING ON BART FOR 15 YEARS

I am a former priest of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, but now retired and have returned to my native state of Wisconsin. I do get your San Diego News Notes, and have just read your March issue

I'd like to make a correction of the title of the article "Catholicism Exposes Catholicism". In a glaring headline, it calls Bart Brewer, a former Jesuit, now a Baptist preacher. Bart, whom I knew for many years, was never a Jesuit, but a Carmelite here in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. I do not understand why Bart did not correct the matter before it got into your News Notes.

I've been trying to bring back Bart to the church now for 15 years. I've given him good books on apologetics and have proven from his own Bible the truth of the Catholic Church to whom Christ gave all authority to teach all nations, and to send the Holy Spirit to guide and protect the church from doctrinal error The trouble with Bart is that he refuses to re-read proofs of the Catholic church's teachings. Even if I show him from Scripture, his own bible or truth, he'll still deny it. It's like saying, "Yes, 2+2=5."

He left the church to become a 7th day Adventist, spent one year, and ordained as a 7th day Adventist, he became a Baptist minister. Bart is not stable in his beliefs. He harmed his Carmelite order more than the order harmed him, and one can't argue with him as I was told in a letter from the Carmelites.

The Catholic Church teaches that all people who are in good faith can save their souls even by just observing the Natural Law which are the 10 Commandments written in the hearts of all men. Thus, Jews, Muslims, sincere Protestants can save their souls provided it's not their fault for not being Catholic and Christian.

But then there are some people who sin against the Holy Spirit by resisting His graces. Bart certainly should be able to review the teachings of the church. All we can do is to pray for him that God will be merciful to him and that he'll have the grace to be absolved at his deathbed. I have written to Bart about the article. We are friends, yes, and so I speak my mind as a friend, who knows his Bible and theology.

Sincerely yours in Christ

Father Joseph Margola
Milwaukee, Wisconsin

ASK THEMSELVES ONE VERY BIG QUESTION

Those of the laity, priests and religious who continuously find fault with your fine publications because you appear to them to be attacking their hierarchy, if they are sincere in their stated desire to defend the one, true, Catholic, and apostolic Faith, should ask themselves one very pertinent big question. "Had I lived during the so-called Reformation in England, would I have supported Cardinal Woolsey, or would I have supported Canonized Martyr Bishop St. John Fisher? If their answer is the former, they should ask themselves where their souls would very possibly be today!

Kenneth Fisher
Chairman & Founder
Concerned Roman Catholics of America
Holy Innocents Reparation Committee

(Editor: the following is a letter sent by Father Richard Perozich of Our Lady of Sacred Heart Parish in University Heights to State Senator Susan Davis)

I am a voting member of your district, a Roman Catholic, a scientist, and a priest whose life work is to preach the word of God so that people might come to know Him and have life in abundance. In order to provide the fullness of life, a commitment to personal growth beyond current feelings and a commitment to good moral behavior are essential. The atmosphere for growth and morality are established in the private forum such as the Church and family, and in the public forum of society with a sense of morality and public laws to promote what is good for people. In an address to the law society in Rome on May 2, 1998 , U. S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said, "...It just seems to me incompatible with democratic theory that it's good and right for the state to do something that the majority of the people do not want done,...that in the face of bad law,...the whole theory of a democratic system is you must persuade the people that it is bad. I do not think that any state can provide for its people a society that is any better than the virtue of its people. And if the people do not have that virtue, the state cannot impose it. At least in a democratic system.

There are several bills before the California Assembly which would add sexual orientation to the list of human attributes against which discrimination would be unjust, even including marriage or other recognized unions outside of a marriage between man and woman. These bills are trying to establish homosexuality as a trait equal with sex, race, national origin. One's sex, race, or national origin have no moral component, that is they have nothing to do with behavior which would affect society. Sexuality does have a moral component, affecting the virtue of our society, affecting the formation of our people and how we respond to one another.

As a Roman Catholic I agree with religion's teaching that sexual attraction is not an attribute equal to race, national origin, or sex. I agree that while having same sex attraction is not sinful, that acting on it is wrong. To grow, the depravity of the action must be taught, as well as the possibility of reaching peace through the chaste life. As a scientist with a B.S. and an M.S., I acknowledge that no scientific evidence exists anywhere which supports gay propaganda that sexual attraction is genetic, hormonal, or immutable, while acknowledging a large body of evidence that sexual attraction is developmental with its underlying force in early relationships, that it sometimes is arrested manifesting itself in same sex attraction which is not always permanent.

As a Catholic and an American, I find it deplorable that anyone be insulted or assaulted for what a person feels or believes, even if one promotes the self with a reductionist reference of himself as a gay or herself as a lesbian. Sexual activity outside of marriage contributes nothing positive to society, and indeed poses problems of diseases of the body and the spirit. It detracts from the virtue of us as Americans, just as do attacks of hate against one another. Being required to accept as normal same sex attraction, to teach it, to be required to attend diversity training, or to promote free sexual expression would also violate the rights of religion to promote virtuous morality. Please vote against any bill which would add sexual orientation or homosexuality as virtuous traits which require acceptance by all, in particular AB222, AB 101, AB26, and AB 107.

Sincerely in Christ

Father Richard L. Perozich

TOP