Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radio Replies Second Volume - Communism Condemned
Celledoor.Com ^ | 1940 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

Posted on 03/17/2012 8:07:16 AM PDT by GonzoII

Communism Condemned

1139. Why does not the Church accept Socialism?

She cannot accept a system which is based upon merely materialistic views of humanity, as if man were composed of body only, and did not possess an immortal soul, nor have any prospects of a future life. Also Socialism in practice, instead of making your lot any better, would reduce thousands of others to the same distressing state. The Church advocates strongly both social justice and social charity, two things conspicuously absent from the world today. Her principles would mean many reforms in the socialistic direction. But she cannot sanction the program or system of Socialism in its entirety. That would be completely destructive of Christian civilization.

1140. Has not Karl Marx done more for the uplift of the working classes than Jesus by all His teachings?

Most decidedly not. Few men have done more to give the working class a purely material outlook than Karl Marx. And to give any man a purely material outlook is not to uplift him, but to degrade him. Man consists of a spiritual soul and a material body. The spiritual soul can lift the material body to heaven; the material body can drag the spiritual soul to hell. In the teaching of Jesus the soul is all-important and must lift man to God. In the teaching of Karl Marx the material body is most important and must be attended to — even if the soul be dragged down to hell.

Where is the uplift in substituting materialistic mud for man's true spiritual nobility? Karl Marx would have man to be a crawler in the dust — perhaps a fat well-nourished and comfortable crawler — but nevertheless — a crawler in the dust.

1141. Why is the Roman Catholic Church so vehemently opposed to Communism?

Because that Church is exceedingly anxious to vindicate the rights of God, and to secure the salvation and sanctification of men.

1142. On what grounds do you condemn Communism?

I could reply in a few words by saying, "On the ground of insanity." But you will want the insanity proved. Does Communism violate reason to such an extent that it can be called madness? I maintain that it does. It is bad for the individual, for the family, and for society itself. The individual right of ownership is destroyed. Communism restricts or even abolishes the right to private property sanctioned by the natural law and positive legislation of God. No true incentive to self-development and progress is left. Liberty, so prized by every reasonable human being, is abolished. Men are but cogs in a machine, and the so-called will of the people ends in the will of a tyrannical group of leaders. In addition, the family is broken, and children are deprived of true parental care and education. Russia, in great part, is a huge foundling home; if it can be called a home at all. The State itself cannot provide for its own citizens. It cannot regulate supplies in accordance with demands, and people starve in outlying quarters if only because overlooked by authorities. Few people realize the immense flood of misery and suffering Communism has meant in Russia. But, in addition to the dictates of reason prompted by the thought of the individual, the family, and the State itself, Communism is the declared enemy of religion. And religion is absolutely essential to the welfare of man, quite independently of the fact that God has the foremost right to man's acknowledgment and service. Also because Communism seeks to place all man's happiness in material things only, it is a denial of the true spiritual nobility of man. A Catholic who supports Communism is supporting a force which aims at the destruction of religion and above all of the Catholic Church. Your question is really like asking, "Why cannot a child assist the murderer of its mother?"

1143. Would one be right in suggesting that the Roman Catholic Church is the richest in the world in worldly wealth, and is opposed to Communism because the confiscation of its wealth would reduce its power?

One would not be right in suggesting that. The Catholic Church does not want any power for the mere sake of having it. If she desires any influence in this world it is only insofar as that influence will enable her to do good on behalf of the souls of men.

Naturally she would dread any confiscation of the means at her disposal which would diminish or cripple her work. The confiscation of her Churches, hospitals, orphanages, and other charitable institutions, together with her schools, would undoubtedly interfere with her worship of God and service of mankind. And it would be unjust, of course. For if Catholics have chosen to make sacrifices on behalf of their religion, it is pretty cool for others who have not made similar sacrifices to step in and say, "Let us confiscate all your savings on behalf of your religion for our own use and benefit."

Yet these effects of Communism are not the real worry of the Church. The Church condemns Communism because it is based on principles concerning man's personal, religious, social and political destiny which are directly opposed to the teachings of Christ. These false principles are of the very essence of Communism. Of its very nature it must fight against God, against religion, and against every moral code outside its materialistic horizon.

1144. Why sound the note of alarm concerning Communism?

I utter a warning, giving reasons to show that it is not ill-founded.

1145. If your Church is, as alleged, founded by the Son of God who promised to be with it all days, why should you fear the Communists?

I do not fear that they will succeed in nullifying the promise of Christ to be with the Catholic Church all days till the end of the world. But I do fear that they will destroy both the temporal and eternal happiness of far more of my fellow human beings than I can bear to think.

1146. Why should you fear the effects of an anti-God Campaign?

Because I cannot be indifferent to the insulting of God by the very creatures who owe their existence to Him; nor can I be indifferent to the misery of fellow human beings who, by their deliberate rejection of God, deserve rejection by Him for all eternity.

1147. Surely God can look after His own — if they be His own.

Here you wish to imply that, if there be a God, an anti-God campaign should have no effects. But you omit consideration of the fact that men have their own responsibilities. God may command them to serve Him, but He will not compel them to do so. He won't take back the gift of freewill. And since each man is confronted with a choice, it is quite possible for the urging of motives in favor of an evil choice to have an evil effect. And Christians have a duty to expose the evil character of motives which are wrapped up in a sugar-coating of apparent good to deceive the undiscerning. God certainly can look after His own if they allow Him to do so. But even those who are now His own will not necessarily do their part in looking after themselves.

1148. You said that, if Communism triumphed, religion would be persecuted and driven underground.

That is true.

1149. I have always understood that Jesus promised suffering and persecution to His followers. Is there not a want of faith in your complaints?

I did not complain of any prospective persecution. I did complain of the apathy of professing Christians by which they tolerate the causes of Communism and even foster its growth. And if I predict an intensified attack on religion, I do so as an appeal to zeal for the welfare of the religion of Christ in human hearts, rather than from any desire to escape altogether the sufferings and persecution promised by Jesus. Not want of faith, but a spirit of faith prompts zeal for the extension of the Kingdom of Christ in human souls.

1150. You have frequently complained that the press, whether in books or newspapers, has given a distorted account of Catholicism and its activities.

I have. Both religious and political bias have been evident over and over again in published reports concerning the Catholic Church.

1151. Is it not conceivable, then, that the Capitalist Press will also twist things in their favor against Socialism and Communism — their deadliest enemies?

It is not only conceivable, but it is morally certain that the Capitalist Press as well as the Communist Press will be guided, not by a love of truth, but by expediency in its presentation of matter for its readers. That is why, to form a just estimate of what we read, we must watch the trend of world events, and discern the motives of various parties and systems in the world. Then, in the light of those motives, we can estimate the worth of the information put before us by the various journals devoted to the interests of any given party. You see I not only maintain that the "Capitalistic Press" misrepresents issues on Catholicism, it will misrepresent almost anything should the expediency of the moment require it. And so will any newspapers published by any parties or systems in which the prudence of this world only is accepted as a standard. The materialistic outlook, whether of Capitalism or Communism, has little in common with any ideas of moral obligation.

1152. There has been much propaganda put out by the Capitalist Press to indicate that Communism in Russia is anti-Christ.

I don't think the Capitalist Press knows very much on the subject of anti-Christ. Nor is it very interested in that subject. When political expediency seemed to require it, the Press sought to enkindle antipathy to Russian Communism by dwelling on its anti-religious character, hoping to appeal to such religious susceptibilities as its readers might possess. But you can be sure that the Press had no more love for religion than it manifested for Russian Communism.

1153. Is not Communism in Russia rather anti-"The Orthodox Russian Church"; a "spur" I believe from the Catholic Church.

The Orthodox Russian Church is no more a "spur" from the Catholic Church than any Protestant Church. It is both heretical and schismatical, and entirely independent of the Catholic Church. Meantime Communism in Russia, and everywhere so long as it remains Communism, is not only anti-"The Orthodox Russian Church," but anti-God, and anti all religion. It has to be, of its very nature, which is essentially materialistic. Lenin's dictum still stands for all Communists, namely, "All religious ideas are an unspeakable abomination."

1154. It is well-known history that the Russian Orthodox Church was on the side of the ruling powers in keeping down the working classes prior to the 1917 revolution.

That is true. For the Russian Orthodox Church was essentially a National Church subject to the control of the ruling powers. And the ruling powers used it practically as a State Department for the securing of their own ends.

1155. Is it not natural for the now liberated working people to feel strongly against so-called Christian activities?

We can speak of the Russian workers as liberated from the old regime. But they are certainly not liberated under the present regime.

Letting that go, however, it was natural that, in reacting against the old political regime, they should react against the Church identified with that regime. And as practically the only professing form of Christianity they knew was that of the Russian Orthodox Church, it is not surprising that they termed themselves anti-Christian. I say that that was natural. But I do not admit that it was justified. For the heretical and schismatical Russian Church was not truly representative of Christianity.

1156. In denying that a good Christian could be a Communist, you may point to the trials and shootings in Russia.

In giving my reasons for my assertion I did not mention those.

1157. I cannot accept that as an answer, for in our so-called Christian countries the ruthless Capitalist States murder thousands of people physically and mentally in poverty and suffering.

Firstly, if I say that Communist Russia is not Christian, you do not disprove my statement by saying that Capitalist countries are not Christian.

Secondly, you yourself eliminate any reference to Christianity by terming those Capitalist States "so-called Christian countries." If they are not truly, but only "so-called Christian countries," your argument is not against Christianity, but against those unchristian Capitalist States.

Thirdly, while you apparently don't agree with my estimate of Communism, I do agree with your estimate of Capitalism. You see, its a three-cornered fight — Catholicism, Capitalism, and Communism. Catholicism is opposed to the materialistic outlook and the injustice of both Capitalism and Communism. But you fail to see that. You see only the opposition of the Catholic Church to Communism, and at once proceed to identify her with Capitalism. In that you are much mistaken.

1158. In his Encyclical letter Quadragesimo Anno of May 15th, 1931, Pope Pius XI, said, "No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true Socialist." Does the Pope's infallibility apply to this particular statement?

Yes. It is not a definition, but it is an infallible judgment on a matter connected with Christian morality in which the Pope speaks as Supreme Head of the Church with the intention of deciding the matter definitely for the benefit of the whole Catholic world.

Thus he says clearly — "This question is holding many minds in suspense. Catholics are raising their eyes towards the Holy See earnestly beseeching Us to decide.

In our paternal solicitude we desire to satisfy these petitions and we pronounce as follows: 'While Socialism really remains Socialism, it cannot be brought into harmony with the dogmas of the Catholic Church — the reason being that it conceives human society in a way utterly alien to Christian truth.'" A few lines later the Pope says, "All that we have thus far laid down and established by our Sovereign Authority."

The utterance therefore is certainly to be classed as an infallible judgment. The Pope explains the sense of his condemnation by saying that even moderate Socialism which refuses to make use of physical force and which condemns class-warfare and the abolition of private property, is yet incompatible with Catholic doctrine. Why? Because it acts on the principle that material welfare is the purpose of man's existence or at least the purpose of social organization, while the Catholic Church declares that men both individually and socially must primarily consider the praise and glory of the Creator by the fulfilling of individual and social duties for the love of God and in accordance with His laws. And this in order to attain not only temporal but eternal happiness. If a policy of social reform includes all these principles of the Catholic religion it is no longer real Socialism in the accepted sense of that word. Therefore no man can be truly Catholic and truly Socialist at the same time.

1159. Granted that this decision be infallible, is it a sin for a good Catholic to be a true Socialist?

If he supports real Socialism he is no longer a good Catholic. Any Catholic who supports a truly Socialistic program adopts conduct which is sinful, and he is guilty of sin once he realizes the decision of the Catholic Church. Thus the Pope says "With grief we perceive certain Catholics joining the ranks of Socialism — deserting the Church. We have wondered why they are going so far astray — for any real injustice they denounce We denounce. They are unhappily deceived and wandering far from the paths of truth and salvation." It is therefore sinful — gravely so, for a Catholic to support Socialism.

1160. After a lifetime of study of the Capitalist System, I am firmly convinced, although a Catholic, that Socialism is the only right system.

By saying that you but afford a further proof of the necessity of being guided by the Catholic Church where principles of morality are concerned. A study of the evils and abuses in Capitalism cannot possibly prove that Socialism is the only system.

1161. Pope Innocent III taught that whatever a person does against his conscience leads to hell.

He certainly did not teach that. Venial sins are contrary to conscience, but they do not take people to hell. The Church certainly does teach, however, that a man is obliged to follow a right and normal conscience.

1162. If my conscience tells me to be a Socialist, and Pope Innocent III tells me I must follow my conscience, how explain the contradiction when Pope Pius XI declares that no Catholic can be a Socialist?

There is no contradiction. Pope Innocent does not say that you must follow your conscience as you have formed it at present. A man can have an erroneous conscience, either because he has deliberately warped it by self-deception, or because he is inadequately informed. There are external tests by which a man can tell whether his conscience is right or wrong. Conscience is certainly wrong if it bids conduct opposed to God's known law, or opposed to the obedience due to the authority of Christ in His Church. A right conscience in a Catholic dictates obedience to the teachings of the Church, and you would follow your real conscience if you renounced opinions opposed to her definite teachings and allowed yourself to be guided by her in this matter. Pope Pius XI said that no Catholic can be a Socialist. Pope Innocent III says that you must obey your conscience. If you do, you will not be a Socialist, but adhere to the teaching of the Pope.

Encoding copyright 2009 by Frederick Manligas Nacino. Some rights reserved.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0

TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: communism; radiorepliesvoltwo

Preface To Volume One of "Radio Replies"



Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing. These millions can hardly be blamed for hating Catholics because Catholics "adore statues"; because they "put the Blessed Mother on the same level with God"; because they say "indulgence is a permission to commit sin"; because the Pope "is a Fascist"; because the "Church is the defender of Capitalism." If the Church taught or believed any one of these things it should be hated, but the fact is that the Church does not believe nor teach any one of them. It follows then that the hatred of the millions is directed against error and not against truth. As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do.

If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates. My reason for doing this would be, that if Christ is in any one of the churches of the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh. If you would find Christ today, then find the Church that does not get along with the world. Look for the Church that is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which, in seasons of bigotry, men say must be destroyed in the name of God as men crucified Christ and thought they had done a service to God. Look for the Church which the world rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because He called Himself the Truth. Look for the Church which is rejected by the world as Our Lord was rejected by men. Look for the Church which amid the confusion of conflicting opinions, its members love as they love Christ, and respect its Voice as the very voice of its Founder, and the suspicion will grow, that if the Church is unpopular with the spirit of the world, then it is unworldly, and if it is unworldly, it is other-worldly. Since it is other-worldly it is infinitely loved and infinitely hated as was Christ Himself. But only that which is Divine can be infinitely hated and infinitely loved. Therefore the Church is Divine.

If then, the hatred of the Church is founded on erroneous beliefs, it follows that basic need of the day is instruction. Love depends on knowledge for we cannot aspire nor desire the unknown. Our great country is filled with what might be called marginal Christians, i.e., those who live on the fringe of religion and who are descendants of Christian living parents, but who now are Christians only in name. They retain a few of its ideals out of indolence and force of habit; they knew the glorious history of Christianity only through certain emasculated forms of it, which have married the spirit of the age and are now dying with it. Of Catholicism and its sacraments, its pardon, its grace, its certitude and its peace, they know nothing except a few inherited prejudices. And yet they are good people who want to do the right thing, but who have no definite philosophy concerning it. They educate their children without religion, and yet they resent the compromising morals of their children. They would be angry if you told them they were not Christian, and yet they do not believe that Christ is God. They resent being called pagans and yet they never take a practical cognizance of the existence of God. There is only one thing of which they are certain and that is that things are not right as they are. It is just that single certitude which makes them what might be called the great "potentials," for they are ready to be pulled in either of two directions. Within a short time they must take sides; they must either gather with Christ or they must scatter; they must either be with Him or against Him; they must either be on the cross as other Christs, or under it as other executioners. Which way will these marginal Christians tend? The answer depends upon those who have the faith. Like the multitudes who followed Our Lord into the desert, they are as sheep without a shepherd. They are waiting to be shepherded either with the sheep or goats. Only this much is certain. Being human and having hearts they want more than class struggle and economics; they want Life, they want Truth, and they want Love. In a word, they want Christ.

It is to these millions who believe wrong things about the Church and to these marginal Christians, that this little book is sent. It is not to prove that they are "wrong"; it is not to prove that we are "right"; it is merely to present the truth in order that the truth may conquer through the grace of God. When men are starving, one need not go to them and tell them to avoid poison; nor to eat bread because there are vitamins in bread. One need only go to them and tell them that they are starving and here is bread, and the laws of nature will do the rest. This book of "Radio Replies" with 1,588 questions and answers goes out on a similar mission. Its primary task is not to humble the erroneous; not to glorify the Catholic Church as intellectual and self-righteous, but to present the truth in a calm, clear manner in order that with the grace of God souls may come to the blessed embrace of Christ.

It is not only the point of "Radio Replies" to prove that the Church is the only completely soul-satisfying Church in existence at the present day; it is also to suggest that the Catholic Church is the only Church existing today which goes back to the time of Christ. History is so very clear on this point, it is curious how many minds miss its obviousness. When therefore you, the readers of "Radio Replies" in the twentieth century, wish to know about Christ and about His early Church, and about His mysteries, we ask you to go not only to the written records but to the living Church which began with Christ Himself. That Church or that Mystical Person which has been living all these centuries is the basis of our faith and to us Catholics it speaks this way: "I live with Christ. I saw His Mother and I know her to be a Virgin and the loveliest and purest of all women in heaven or on earth; I saw Christ at Caesarea-Philippi, when, after changing Simon's name to Rock, He told him he was the rock upon which the Church would be built and that it would endure unto the consummation of the world. I saw Christ hanging on a cross and I saw Him rise from His tomb; I saw Magdalene rush to His feet; I saw the angels clad in white beside the great stone; I was in the Cenacle room when doubting Thomas put fingers into His hands; I was on Olivet when He ascended into heaven and promised to send His Spirit to the apostles to make them the foundation of His new Mystical Body on earth. I was at the stoning of Stephen, saw Saul hold the garments of those who slew him, and later I heard Saul, as Paul, preach Christ and Him crucified; I witnessed the beheading of Peter and Paul in Rome, and with my very eyes saw tens of thousands of martyrs crimson the sands with their blood, rather than deny the faith Peter and Paul had preached unto them; I was living when Boniface was sent to Germany, when Augustine when to England, Cyril and Methodius to the Poles, and Patrick to Ireland; at the beginning of the ninth century I recall seeing Charlemagne crowned as king in matters temporal as Peter's vicar was recognized as supreme in matters spiritual; in the thirteenth century I saw the great stones cry out in tribute to me, and burst into Gothic Cathedrals; in the shadows of those same walls I saw great Cathedrals of thought arise in the prose of Aquinas and Bonaventure, and in the poetry of Dante; in the sixteenth century I saw my children softened by the spirit of the world leave the Father's house and reform the faith instead of reforming discipline which would have brought them back again into my embrace; in the last century and at the beginning of this I heard the world say it could not accept me because I was behind the times. I am not behind the times, I am only behind the scenes. I have adapted myself to every form of government the world has ever known; I have lived with Caesars and kings, tyrants and dictators, parliaments and presidents, monarchies and republics. I have welcomed every advance of science, and were it not for me the great records of the pagan world would not have been preserved. It is true I have not changed my doctrine, but that is because the ‘doctrine is not mine but His who sent Me.’ I change my garments which belong to time, but not my Spirit which belongs to eternity. In the course of my long life I have seen so many modern ideas become unmodern, that I know I shall live to chant a requiem over the modern ideas of this day, as I chanted it over the modern ideas of the last century. I celebrated the nineteen-hundredth anniversary of the death of my Redeemer and yet I am no older now than then, for my Spirit is Eternal, and the Eternal never ages. I am the abiding Personage of the centuries. I am the contemporary of all civilizations. I am never out of date, because the dateless; never out of time, because the timeless. I have four great marks: I am One, because I have the same Soul I had in the beginning; I am Holy, because that Soul is the Spirit of Holiness; I am Catholic, because that Spirit pervades every living cell of my Body; I am Apostolic, because my origin is identical with Nazareth, Galilee and Jerusalem. I shall grow weak when my members become rich and cease to pray, but I shall never die. I shall be persecuted as I am persecuted now in Mexico and Russia; I shall be crucified as I was on Calvary, but I shall rise again, and finally when time shall be no more, and I shall have grown to my full stature, then shall I be taken into heaven as the bride of my Head, Christ, where the celestial nuptials shall be celebrated, and God shall be all in all, because His Spirit is Love and Love is Heaven."



Introduction To The American Edition Of "Radio Replies" Vol One


"Radio Replies" by Rev. Dr. Rumble, M.S.C., is the result of five years of answering questions during a one-hour Question Box Program over Radio Station 2SM Sydney, N.S.W. The revision of "Radio Replies" for American readers was prompted by the widespread interest the Australian edition created among Protestants and Catholics during the summer of 1937, when I was carrying on as a Catholic Campaigner for Christ, the Apostolate to the man in the street through the medium of my trailer and loud-speaking system. In the distribution of pamphlets and books on Catholicism "Radio Replies" proved the most talked of book carried in my trailer display of Catholic literature. The clergy and laymen engaged in Street Preaching agree that it is not so much what you say over the microphone in answer to questions from open air listeners but what you GET INTO THEIR HANDS TO READ.

My many converts of the highways and parks throughout the Archdiocese of St. Paul have embraced the faith as a result of studying this book. Whole families have come into the Church through reading the book by this renowned convert from Anglicanism. The delay in getting copies from Sydney and the prohibitive cost of the book on this side of the universe led me to petition the author to have published a CHEAP AMERICAN EDITION in order to get this Encyclopaedia of Catholic Doctrine into the hands of fellow citizens. Because of the author's genius for brevity, preciseness, fearlessness and keen logic that avoids the usually long Scriptural and Traditional arguments of the average question and answer book, which is beyond the capacity of the man in the street, this manual of 1,588 questions and replies has already attracted readers throughout Australia, New Zealand, Africa, India, England, Ireland, Canada and now the United States.

The questions he answers are the questions I had to answer before friendly and hostile audiences throughout my summer campaign. The piquant and provocative subject matter of this book makes it a fascinating assembly of 300 or more worth-while pamphlet tracts, a dictionary of doctrine for the desk of the FAMILY, the STUDENT, the SHOP HAND, the OFFICE WORKER, the ATTORNEY, the DOCTOR, the TEACHER, and the PREACHER. It is a handy standard reference book of excellence for popular questions which are more than ever being asked by restless and bewildered multitudes. It is a textbook for the Confraternities of Christian Doctrine Classes and Study Clubs.

A non-Catholic Professor after reading the book stated that, "If the Catholic Church could defend herself so logically as 'Radio Replies' demonstrates, then I do not see why you don't get more converts." Members of the Knights of Columbus, the Holy Name Societies and numerous women's societies have written in that they no longer have to apologetically say, "I can't answer that one." Catholic students in non-sectarian colleges and universities write in that they now walk the campus with this book under their arms, ready for all challenges and that this manual of ready reference has cured their INFERIORITY COMPLEX ON EXPOSITION OF CATHOLIC CLAIMS. Lapsed Catholics have come into my trailer-office to confess that the reading of "Radio Replies" has brought them back to the Church.

I am grateful to His Excellency Archbishop John G. Murray, D.D. for his approval of this compendium of dogmatic and moral theology for readers of the American Commonwealth and I am deeply appreciative to Rt. Rev. Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, D.D. for writing the Preface to this American edition.

From my experience on the Catholic Radio Hour, on the lecture platform, and in the pulpit, I do not hesitate to say that HERE AT LAST is the book that has something for everybody, the book for the UNINFORMED CATHOLIC, THE UNEDUCATED AND EDUCATED LAPSED CATHOLIC, and the PROSPECTIVE CONVERT.

Rev. Charles Mortimer Carty




Historical Context of "Radio Replies"

By markomalley

If one recalls the time frame from which Radio Replies emerged, it can explain some of the frankness and lack of tact in the nature of the responses provided.

It was during this timeframe that a considerable amount of anti-Catholic rhetoric came to the forefront, particularly in this country. Much of this developed during the Presidential campaign of Al Smith in 1928, but had its roots in the publication of Alexander Hislop's The Two Babylons, originally published in book form in 1919 and also published in pamphlet form in 1853.

While in Britain (and consequently Australia), the other fellow would surely have experienced the effects of the Popery Act, the Act of Settlement, the Disenfranchising Act, the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and many others since the reformation (that basically boiled down to saying, "We won't kill you if you just be good, quiet little Catholics"). Even the so-called Catholic Relief Acts (1778, 1791, 1829, 1851, 1871) still had huge barriers placed in the way.

And of course, they'd both remember the American Protective Association, "Guy Fawkes Days" (which included burning the Pontiff in effigy), the positions of the Whigs and Ultra-Torries, and so on.

A strong degree of "in your face" from people in the position of authoritativeness was required back in the 1930s, as there was a large contingent of the populations of both the US and the British Empire who were not at all shy about being "in your face" toward Catholics in the first place (in other words, a particularly contentious day on Free Republic would be considered a mild day in some circles back then). Sure, in polite, educated circles, contention was avoided (thus the little ditty about it not being polite to discuss religion in public, along with sex and politics), but it would be naive to assume that we all got along, or anything resembling that, back in the day.

Having said all of the above, reading the articles from the modern mindset and without the historical context that I tried to briefly summarize above, they make challenging reading, due to their bluntness.

The reader should also keep in mind that the official teaching of the Church takes a completely different tone, best summed up in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame."269 The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism270 - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.271

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers .... All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324

269 UR 3 § 1.
270 Cf. CIC, can. 751.
271 Origen, Hom. in Ezech. 9,1:PG 13,732.
272 UR 3 § 1.
273 LG 8 § 2.
274 UR 3 § 2; cf. LG 15.
275 Cf. UR 3.
276 Cf. LG 8.
322 LG 15.
323 UR 3.
324 Paul VI, Discourse, December 14, 1975; cf. UR 13-18.

1 posted on 03/17/2012 8:07:19 AM PDT by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ColdOne; fidelis; MI; Sir_Humphrey; dsc; annalex; Citizen Soldier; bdeaner; CatQuilt; Graing; ...

Radio Replies Ping

"Communism Condemned "

FReep-mail me to get on or off

“The Radio Replies Ping-List”


2 posted on 03/17/2012 8:08:47 AM PDT by GonzoII (Quia tu es, Deus, fortitudo mea...Quare tristis es anima mea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

The Radio Replies Series: Volume One

The Radio Replies Series: Volume Two

Chapter One: God

Radio Replies Volume Two: Proof of God's Existence
Radio Replies Volume Two: God's Nature
Radio Replies Volume Two: Supreme Control Over All Things and the Problem of Suffering and Evil

Chapter Two: Man

Radio Replies Volume Two: Destiny of Man/Death
Radio Replies Volume Two: Immortality of Man's Soul & Pre-existence Denied
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Human Free Will
Radio Replies Volume Two: Determinism Absurd

Chapter Three: Religion

Radio Replies Volume Two: Necessity of Religion
Radio Replies Volume Two: Salvation of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume Two: Voice of Science
Radio Replies Volume Two: Religious Racketeers
Radio Replies Volume Two: Divine Revelation

Radio Replies Volume Two: Revealed Mysteries
Radio Replies Volume Two: Existence of Miracles

Chapter Four: The Religion of the Bible

Radio Replies Volume Two: Gospels Historical
Radio Replies Volume Two: Missing Books of the Bible
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Bible Inspired
Radio Replies Volume Two: Biblical Account of Creation
Radio Replies Volume Two: New Testament Problems

Radio Replies Volume Two: Supposed Contradictions in Sacred Scripture

Chapter Five: The Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume Two: Source of Christian Teaching
Radio Replies Volume Two: Jewish Rejecton of Christ
Radio Replies Volume Two: Christianity a New Religion
Radio Replies Volume Two: Rational Foundation for Belief
Radio Replies Volume Two: Causes of Unbelief

Chapter Six: A Definite Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume Two: Divisions Amongst Christians
Radio Replies Volume Two: Schisms Unjustified
Radio Replies Volume Two: Facing the Problem
Radio Replies Volume Two: Wrong Approach
Radio Replies Volume Two: Is One Religion as Good as Another?

Radio Replies Volume Two: Obligation of Inquiry
Radio Replies Volume Two: Charity and Tolerance

Chapter Seven: The Protestant Reformation

Radio Replies Volume Two: Meaning of "Protestant"
Radio Replies Volume Two: Causes of the Reformation
Radio Replies Volume Two: Catholic Reaction
Radio Replies Volume Two: Reformers Mistaken
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Idealization of Protestantism
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Catholic Estimate

Chapter Eight: The Truth of Catholicism

Radio Replies Volume Two: Meaning of the Word "Church"
Radio Replies Volume Two: Origin of the Church
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Catholic Claim
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Roman Hierarchy
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Pope

Radio Replies Volume Two: The Petrine Text
Radio Replies Volume Two: St. Peter's Supremacy
Radio Replies Volume Two: St. Peter in Rome
Radio Replies Volume Two: Temporal Power
Radio Replies Volume Two: Infallibility

Radio Replies Volume Two: Unity of the Church
Radio Replies Volume Two: Holiness of the Church
Radio Replies Volume Two: Catholicity of the Church
Radio Replies Volume Two: Apostolicity of the Church
Radio Replies Volume Two: Indefectibility of the Church
Radio Replies Volume Two: Obligation to be a Catholic

Chapter Nine: The Church and the Bible

Radio Replies Volume Two: Catholic Attitude Towards the Bible
Radio Replies Volume Two: Is Bible Reading Forbidden to Catholics?
Radio Replies Volume Two: Protestant Bibles
Radio Replies Volume Two: Catholic Douay Version
Radio Replies Volume Two: Principle of Private Interpretation

Radio Replies Volume Two: Need of Tradition
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Teaching Authority of the Catholic Church

Chapter Ten: The Dogmas of the Church

Radio Replies Volume Two: Revolt Against Dogma
Radio Replies Volume Two: Value of a Creed
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Divine Gift of Faith
Radio Replies Volume Two: Faith and Reason
Radio Replies Volume Two: The "Dark Ages"

Radio Replies Volume Two: The Claims of Science
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Holy Trinity
Radio Replies Volume Two: Creation and Evolution
Radio Replies Volume Two: Angels
Radio Replies Volume Two: Devils

Radio Replies Volume Two: Man
Radio Replies Volume Two: Reincarnation
Radio Replies Volume Two: Sin
Radio Replies Volume Two: Christ
Radio Replies Volume Two: Mary

Radio Replies Volume Two: Grace and Salvation
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Sacraments [Baptism]
Radio Replies Volume Two: Confession
Radio Replies Volume Two: Holy Eucharist
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Sacrifice of the Mass

Radio Replies Volume Two: Holy Communion
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Catholic Priesthood
Radio Replies Volume Two: Marriage and Divorce
Radio Replies Volume Two: Extreme Unction
Radio Replies Volume Two: Judgment

Radio Replies Volume Two: Hell
Radio Replies Volume Two: Purgatory
Radio Replies Volume Two: Indulgences
Radio Replies Volume Two: Heaven
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Resurrection of the Body

Radio Replies Volume Two: The End of the World

Chapter Eleven: The Church and Her Moral Teachings

Radio Replies Volume Two: Conscience
Radio Replies Volume Two: Truth
Radio Replies Volume Two: Scandal
Radio Replies Volume Two: Tolerance
Radio Replies Volume Two: Censorship

Radio Replies Volume Two: The Inquisition
Radio Replies Volume Two: Astrology
Radio Replies Volume Two: Other Superstitions
Radio Replies Volume Two: Attendance at Mass
Radio Replies Volume Two: Sex Education

Radio Replies Volume Two: Attitude to "Free Love"
Radio Replies Volume Two: Abortion
Radio Replies Volume Two: Suicide

Chapter Twelve: The Church in Her Worship

Radio Replies Volume Two: Magnificent Edifices
Radio Replies Volume Two: Lavish Ritual
Radio Replies Volume Two: Women in Church
Radio Replies Volume Two: Catholics and "Mother's Day
Radio Replies Volume Two: Liturgical Days

Radio Replies Volume Two: Burial Rites
Radio Replies Volume Two: Candles and Votive Lamps
Radio Replies Volume Two: Rosary
Radio Replies Volume Two: Lourdes Water
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Scapular

Chapter Thirteen: The Church and Social Welfare

Radio Replies Volume Two: Social Influence of the Church
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Education Question
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Church and World Distress
Radio Replies Volume Two: Catholic Attitude Towards Capitalism
Radio Replies Volume Two: The Remedy for Social Ills

Radio Replies Volume Two: Communism Condemned

3 posted on 03/17/2012 8:10:26 AM PDT by GonzoII (Quia tu es, Deus, fortitudo mea...Quare tristis es anima mea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson