Q. In the Gospel of John, chapter 18, the Jewish leaders told Pilate that it was not lawful to put any man to death. However, it seems the leaders attempted to stone Jesus to death earlier, and King Herod ordered the beheading of John the Baptist. Would you please comment on this? — J.D.H., California.
A. If you look again at the passage in John’s Gospel (18:31), you will see that the Jewish leaders told Pilate, “We do not have the right to execute anyone” (emphasis ours). That was true since the Romans had denied the Jewish authorities the right to put anyone to death. If the Jewish leaders had retained that right, they would have stoned Jesus to death. But once they turned Him over to Pilate, then the method of execution became crucifixion. Under Roman law, no Roman citizen could be crucified, but a non-citizen like Jesus, who had been accused of sedition, could be subjected to that form of capital punishment. Recall that St. Paul, who was a Roman citizen, was executed by beheading.
As for King Herod, he was a law unto himself, having put John the Baptist to death for having criticized his adulterous relationship with Herodias, the ex-wife of his half-brother Philip. Herod Antipas was just following in the bloody footsteps of his father, Herod the Great, who had murdered hundreds of people, including his first wife, Mariamne, her mother, and two of their sons.
Q. In the last ten issues or so, The Wanderer has gushed on and on about how wonderful Popes John XXIII and John Paul II were. But in these same issues you have article after article about how millions of Catholics have fallen away since Vatican II, about the little or no faith left among the Catholic people since Vatican II, about the debasing of the liturgy that was occasioned (but not decreed by) Vatican II, and about the general decline of the Catholic Church since Vatican II. Can’t you see that John XXIII and John Paul II are, in effect, emperors without clothes? — G.P., Florida.
A. In his famous fairy tale The Emperor’s New Suit, Hans Christian Andersen told of a very vain emperor whose only interest in life was to dress in the finest clothes. One day, the story goes, two con men came to town and convinced people that they could manufacture the most beautiful clothes out of material that was invisible to any man who was unfit for his office or who was incredibly stupid. When the emperor heard of this, he gave the swindlers a large amount of money to weave new clothes for him.
After a while, the emperor sent two of his most trusted aides to check on the progress of the new suit. They saw only empty looms, but rather than admit that they saw nothing and risk being considered unfit for office or stupid, the two came back praising the beautiful colors and exquisite pattern of the suit. Everyone in the town was talking about the precious cloth, so the emperor himself finally went to see it. Even though he could not see anything at all, the emperor gushed over the empty loom rather than concede that he might be unfit for his office, and he asked the phony weavers to dress him in the new material so that he might process through the town and show all the people his new clothes.
As the emperor marched in the procession, with his courtiers pretending to hold up the train of the nonexistent suit and the people exclaiming how wonderful the emperor looked, suddenly a little child cried out, “But he has nothing on at all.” The cry was soon taken up by the whole crowd, but the emperor refused to admit the truth and continued to parade as if the suit did exist.
We summarized this fairy tale to show how absurd is G.P.’s comment that the two new papal saints were really emperors without clothes. There was nothing vain or phony about John XXIII or John Paul II. They were men of heroic virtue with a great love for God and the people of the world. They were faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church and vigorously promulgated those teachings in speeches, papal encyclicals, and books. The holiness of their lives inspired millions throughout the world, and we are beginning to enjoy in the Church a new generation of holy and articulate priests who are part of what has been termed “the John Paul Generation.”
Those who think that John XXIII “opened the windows” to let the world into the Church are wrong. The Holy Father’s goal was to take the ancient and unchanging teachings of the Church and present them in a new way to a world in need of Jesus and His message. In his talk opening the Second Vatican Council on October 11, 1962, Pope John said that his wish was to transmit the Church’s doctrine “pure and integral, without any attenuation or distortion.”
He said that “our duty is not only to guard this precious treasure . . . but to dedicate ourselves with an earnest will and without fear to that work which our era demands of us, pursuing thus the path which the Church has followed for twenty centuries.”
That some Church leaders — bishops, priests, theologians, catechists — undermined this “precious treasure” and distorted or falsified the teachings that appeared in the 16 documents of Vatican II was not the fault of the man who convoked the council. He was no more responsible for the sad consequences that followed in the wake of Vatican II than is a conscientious parent responsible for a child who makes bad decisions and goes off the track.
How can G.P. compare the pampered and pompous emperor in the fairy tale with John Paul II, who was a courageous survivor of Nazism and Communism, a man who brought the message of Christ to all corners of the globe and inspired millions of young people at World Youth Days in various nations? John Paul tried to reverse the decline of the Church in his travels, in his books and encyclicals explaining and defending Catholic teachings, and in his promulgation of the first Catholic catechism in 400 years so that Catholics would have a sure and certain source of authentic Church teaching.
Was either of these men perfect? They would have been the first to say no. Did everything they tried work out exactly as intended? Certainly not. Did they do the very best job they could as Vicars of Christ on earth? Absolutely, and their elevation to sainthood is proof of that. They demonstrated that the road to sanctity is difficult because the Evil One is busy trying to lead people astray.
These two saints, like many of their Predecessors, showed us by their lives the path that we are to follow if we expect to reach Heaven. Let us now ask for their intercession so that we may achieve the goal which they have already attained.
As for the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), a reading of the 16 documents will show that it did not contradict any of the Church’s previous 20 ecumenical councils. Ralph McInerny explained why this could not happen in his book What Went Wrong With Vatican II?:
“Whatever problems may be posed by the documents of Vatican II, contradictions of earlier councils cannot be one of them. It is the Pope who calls an ecumenical council into session; he monitors the work of the assembled bishops; and he promulgates the documents expressing the judgment of the bishops. When he does that, those documents become the measure of our faith.
“That which makes Vatican II valid is what made Vatican I, the Council of Trent, and every other council valid. To accept one council is to accept them all; to reject one council is to reject them all; we cannot have pick-and-choose conciliarism. I do not, therefore, defend the Second Vatican Council against those who think it is suspect and in contradiction to earlier councils or to solemnly defined teachings of the Church. On the contrary, I take as a necessary premise the fact that we are bound by the teachings of the Second Vatican Council” (pp. 14-15).
Are the problems in the Church that are mentioned in every issue of The Wanderer real problems? They surely are. Can they be solved? They surely can, but only when all the members of the faithful, clergy and laity alike, listen to the promptings of the Holy Spirit and make a real, concerted effort, with the help of the sacraments, especially the Holy Eucharist, to evangelize our post-Christian culture.
This means, first and foremost, telling people about Jesus, for He is the only way, and the only truth, and the only life that can change the world.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress