Heroic Catholicism

Catholic by conviction

This, I believe, is one of the greater problems in the Philippine Catholic world. Even church-going, rosary-rattling Catholics are not Catholics by conviction. Yes, they do their civic duty as Catholics by being generous and kind to others, even those of different faiths, and supportive of the local clergy (often times to the point of idolizing them and turning them into rock stars) that they forget the crux of their Catholicism: why be Catholic at all?

All these ‘other’ things, you could do very well outside the confines of the Catholic faith (save for the clergy part). What makes these social justice-themed acts ABSOLUTELY CATHOLIC? We must create this identity that these things we do is primarily because of what the Church teaches. Not just because it makes us feel happy, warm, and fuzzy inside.

We need heroes. Catholic heroes. Identifiable Catholic heroes. Clergy and laypeople.

At present, I follow two “celebrities” in the Traditional Catholic world who clearly have the zeal to protect and defend the faith. Though at times they are in disagreement on some matters, these two are partially responsible for ‘converting’ me into a traditional-leaning Catholic.

First is Fr. Abe Arganiosa of “The Splendor of the Church” (whose site is, at present, hacked and inaccessible therefore I have not linked to his site). He is an apologist who often writes in ALL CAPS (for whatever reason, i don’t know) in his articles and answers the basic and not-so-basic objections against the faith. Sometimes, I have to cringe at his selection of swear words and wonder why he uses them at all. It often reminds me of the leader of Ang Dating Daan, Ely Soriano, who justifies such use sometimes ad absurdum. Still, some of his articles have helped me in my personal apologetics with those who do not share my Catholic faith.

Second is The Pinoy Catholic or TPC for short. TPC is rather my favorite on the web. ‘Suki‘ as we say in Filipino. With his brutally frank commentary, ‘chismis’ along with sometimes humorous and educational posts regarding liturgical abuses (sometimes identified as GULP Alerts), he follows the line along the even more popular Fr. Z on wdtprs.com and Michael Voris of ChurchMilitantTV. The main difference is that TPC remains anonymous to many. Some say that the power of anonymity gives him the courage to viciously call out on erring priests and wanna-be priests on their dissenting (or sometimes heretical) opinions on matters of faith. He doesn’t give them the benefit of the doubt. I’ve read a lot of similar negative comments where these posts appear: “How uncharitable!” “How very un-Christian!” “Very inconsiderate of the person’s feelings!” but have often sided with him on these things. Because of these, I also find myself annoyed often at mass with all the abuse I’m seeing! (Another reason why I prefer TLM).

A Small Discussion on Celdran’s Conviction

Update: my friend found this post and has somewhat taken offense for having said “that was too low for him.” and has apparently taken it personally. If this was misunderstood, then I apologize deeply. However, to clarify, I would never get into personal attacks. As Fulton Sheen said, “Intolerance applies to principles, never to persons.” and I would like to keep it this way. I was only pertaining to the mention of the ‘cover-ups’ and the Inquisition which are not concerned with the topic, hence the words, “Such a pity.” since I feel for my friend whom I have high regard for because of his wide thinking and voracious appetite for reading. Again, if any of this is misinterpreted at any point, I apologize and clarify that I will not get into personal attacks.

—

My friend, a Born Again Christian, is an ally of Carlos Celdran and of the RH-groups. I tried to respond to his objections to the decision handed to Celdran and how he explains that this does not merit jail time. But as a Catholic, I understand why he does not get it.

1. I cite, as an example, the Eucharist or rather The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. To a Protestant, it is nothing more than just a piece of bread. But to a Catholic, it is Jesus Himself! Should a Protestant throw away a piece of consecrated host, it means nothing to them. But to a Catholic, it would be sacrilege.

2. Saying that he does not intend to do such a thing, (I didn’t say he would. I’m merely illustrating the situation in a different way.) he tells me that my example is misplaced. So I give another example: me slapping two women where one woman is his mother. Naturally, he reacts violently against this but insists that this is even more far-off than the first example. My only point in the example is if you put yourself in the shoes of a good Catholic who recognizes that something, say a church (or his mother, in my example), is sacred or important to you, then desecrating it (or slapping her/insulting her) is a “notoriously offensive” act. Again, this doesn’t seem to be clear to him. I somehow understand why since this isn’t in his culture or set of beliefs as a Protestant.

3. He continually notes jurisprudence in the case of People vs. Baes in 1939 and shares the dissenting opinions of Laurel and Imperial which questions what is “notoriously offensive” to a religious group. Be that as it may, the explanation in the same case notes the testimony of Baes where he felt the “grave profanation of the place.” A place consecrated for holy things is set apart. That is why we have a parish hall for meetings and programs and the liturgy inside the church itself — precisely because we do not want to desecrate what is sacred ground!

In this light, I would like to illustrate this with Moses’ encounter with God through the burning bush. If you believe in the sacredness of the land on which you stand, you will do as Moses did. If you do not believe in it, you would find it without difficulty to stand up and put up a sign saying DAMASO! in front of Moses himself.

4. In the end, there cannot be blame on my friend for not understanding how this is offensive to a Catholic. A REAL CATHOLIC. Not a Cafeteria Catholic. It is such a pity how one can be so passionately against strawmen. He also continually mentions the ‘cover-up’ of sex abuse by priests and even mentions, in passing, the Inquisition. I really thought that was too low for him. Reminds me of an article by Robert Hutchinson I read how atheists simply revert to their one-liner attacks. This is what I saw in my friend. Such a pity.