Vol 15 Issue 12 ~ Editor: Rev. Fr. Courtney Edward Krier
March 19, 2022 ~ Saint Joseph, opn!
1. Sacrament of Penance
2. Third Sunday of Lent
3. Saint Martin of Braga
4. Family and Marriage
5. Articles and notices
Dear Reader:
Today is the Feast of Saint Joseph and it demands that a few words are addressed in his honor. A few years back I provided a month of reflection, so here I wish only to say a few words—words that we never read of Saint Joseph speaking, yet his life tells us all we need to know. His wife, Mary, spoke only to the Angel Gabriel, Saint Elizabeth, and the servants at the Marriage Feast of Cana—these three times sum up a soul’s submission to the Blessed Trinity. Saint Joseph, as a faithful follower of God’s will provides an example of practicing submission to God’s will. Perhaps why March 19 is providentially chosen is to express that Mary was betrothed to Joseph before the Incarnation—and the suffering that he went though once the revelation that his wife was with Child became evident. Caught between the law and love, justice and mercy, Joseph must decide and knowing he had to live with the decision. Settling on a seeming compromise between the two, he is told by an angel in a dream (just as Joseph of Old) to marry the Woman chosen by God to be the Mother of the Redeemer and assume all responsibilities as though he were the natural father of the Child—for only the father had the right to name the first-born child: and thou shalt call his name Jesus . . . and he called his name Jesus. (cf. Matt. 1:21, 25). Did he break the Mosaic Law?
It would appear that the census of Caesar was accepted as fulfilling the prophecy that Jesus was to be born in the Town of David (Bethlehem) as Joseph does not struggle in his decision. The flight into Egypt is a command to which Joseph fully submits in arising and departing even though it was in the middle of the night. On the other hand, on being told in a dream to return to the Land of Israel, (cf. Matt. 2:20) he was hesitant to return to Bethlehem and was visited in a dream again and told to retire to Nazareth—his hesitancy being rewarded. In life there are many decisions that one must make which are possibly opposed to the Will of God in either choice. As parents in raising your children it seems sometimes that whatever decision you make there may be unwanted consequences. In the choice of our vocation, there are also the “what ifs”. Unless it is directly evil or sinful—in which case we can never do what is evil or sinful—we should ask Saint Joseph to intercede to obtain an answer that is in accordance with the Divine Will. We know all decisions have consequences. We know those consequences are not necessarily what we want or expect. But if we have prayed and we are open to God’s grace, we can be certain we did nothing wrong in the choice. If we vacillate, we are certain to do nothing and find ourselves not submitting to God’s Will. May Saint Joseph, who led Mary and Jesus through family life, assist us.
As always, enjoy the readings provided for your benefit.—The Editor
_______________
WHAT IS THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE
SECTION 1
The Church’s Power to Forgive Sins
CHAPTER I
The Existence of the Church’s Power to Forgive Sins
§ 2. The Dogma and the Heretical Counter-propositions
1. Dogma
The Church has received from Christ the power of remitting sins committed after Baptism. (De fide.)
The Council of Trent declared against the Reformers, that Christ bestowed on the Apostles and on their legitimate successors the full power of remitting and retaining sins, in order to reconcile with God those of the faithful who lapsed after Baptism. The power to forgive sins involves not merely the power of preaching the Gospel of the forgiveness of sins, as the Reformers interpreted it, but also the full power of really remitting sins. D 894, 913.
1. Heretical counter-propositions
Many ancient and medieval Christian sects refused to accept the universal nature of the Church’s power to forgive sins and many sects contended that the power to forgive sins appertained to the laity also. The Montanists (Tertullian) excluded from forgiveness the so-called three capital sins, denial of the Faith (idolatry), adultery and murder, and regarded the Perfect Members, the Spirituals, as bearers of the power of forgiving sins. The Novatianists denied to those lapsed from the faith re-admittance to the Church; and as the Church should embrace “the pure” only, they ended by excluding all mortal sinners from reconciliation. For the same reason the Donatists also denied to mortal sinners the possibility of penance and reconciliation. The Spiritualistic sects of the Wycliffites, Waldenscs, Cathari, and the Hussites rejected the ecclesiastical hierarchy and consequently would concede the power of absolution to all good and pious Christians. Wycliffe declared also that the external confession of sins was superfluous and useless (D 587).
The power of the Church to forgive sins was totally denied by the Reformers. Even if initially they were prepared to recognise the validity of Penance or Absolution as a third Sacrament side by side with Baptism and Communion (Apol. Conf. Aug Art. 13), still the Protestant concept of justification necessarily led to the refusal to accept a real power to forgive sins. That is to say, if justification is not a true and real eradication of sins, but merely an external non-imputation or covering of sins on the ground of the fiducial Faith, then absolution is not a true release from sin, but simply a declaration (nuda declaratio) that sins are forgiven on the ground of fiducial Faith, that is mortal sins are not imputed for punishment.
In the Reformers’ view, Penance is not a Sacrament, properly so-called, distinct from Baptism, but basically one and the same Sacrament. By the fact that the sinner remembers the assurance of the forgiveness of sins given in Baptism, and renews the act of fiducial Faith made in Baptism, the sins he commits after Baptism are remitted. Thus, they claimed, Penance is only “a regression to Baptism” (regressus ad baptismum). According to the Conf. Aug. Art. 12, Penance consists of two essential constituent parts: of sorrow, which is conceived as being infused into the conscience by the consciousness of sin (terrores incussi conscientiae agnito peccato), and faith in the forgiveness of sins for Christ’s sake. They asserted that no special confession of sins is necessary, as the person absolving exercises no judicial power over the penitent. The reproach is made against atonement that it is a belittling of the atonement made by Christ, and hence they rejected atonement by the Penitent. Modernism (A. Loisy) teaches that the Primitive Church knew of no reconciliation of the baptised sinner by the authority of the Church. Even after Baptism had been recognised as an ecclesiastical institution, the Modernists claimed that it was not called a Sacrament. The words of John 20, 22 et seq., according to Modernism, assert, as to their content, the same thing as Luke 24, 47 (preaching of Penance for forgiveness of sins) and Mt. 28, 19 (mandate of Baptism), and for this reason must be understood as referring to the forgiveness of sins in Baptism. (D 2046 et seq.).
§ 3. The Testimony of Holy Writ
1. Promise of the Power of the Keys and of the Power of Binding and Loosing.
a) In reward for the confession of Faith made by St. Peter at CaesareaPhilippi, Jesus said to him: “I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven” (Mt. 16, 19a). “The keys of the Kingdom of Heaven” mean supreme authority on earth over the Empire of God. The person who possesses the power of the keys has the full power of allowing a person to enter the Empire of God or to exclude him from it. But as it is precisely sin which hinders the entry into the empire of God in its perfection (cf. Eph. 5, 5; 1 Cor. 6, 9 et seq.; Gal. 5, 19 et seq.), the power to forgive sins must also be included in the power of the keys. Cf. Is. 22, 22; Apoc 1,18; 3,7.
b) Immediately after the promise of the power of the keys, Jesus said to St. Peter: “And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in Heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in Heaven ” (Mt. 16, 19b). “Binding and loosing” is used in rabbinical speech in the sense of the authentic interpretation of the Law, and means according to this, the judgment as to the permissibility or otherwise of an action. Further, it means the exclusion from the community by the imposition of a ban, or the re-acceptance by the removal of a ban. As sin is the ground for the exclusion, the power to forgive sins is included in the power of binding and loosing. In Mt. 18, 18, the power of binding and loosing was promised in similar terms to all the Apostles. As this occurred in the context of the mode whereby a sinner should be admonished, there is obviously an immediate reference in it to the person of the sinner.
2. Transference of the Power to Forgive Sins (John 20, 21 et seq.)
On the evening of the day of the Resurrection Jesus appeared to the Apostles in the locked room, greeted them with the salutation of peace, showed them His hands and His side, and said to them: “ ‘Peace be to you. As the Father /418/ hath sent me, I also send you.’ 22. When He had said this He breathed on them, saying: ‘Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.’ ” With these words Jesus transferred to the Apostles the mission which He Himself had received from the Father, and which He had fulfilled upon earth. The mission consisted in: “to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19, 10). As He Himself had forgiven sins on earth (Mt. 9, 2 et seq.; Mk. 2, 5 et seq.; Luke 5, 20 et seq. — curing of the man afflicted with the palsy; Luke 7, 47 et seq. — the woman who was a public sinner), He now invested the Apostles also with the power to forgive sins. The power communicated is twofold. It may be exercised by way of remission or retention of sins, and its effect is that before God the sins are remitted or retained.
The expression, remittere peccata (ἀφιέναι τὰς ἁμαρτίας), according to its natural meaning and according to numerous biblical parallels (cf. Ps. 50, 3; 1 Chr. 21, 8; Ps. 102, 12; 50, 4; 31, I; 1 John 1, 9; Acts 3, 19) asserts a real eradication of sin, not a mere covering of the guilt of sin or a mere remission of punishment. The interpretation of these words as signifying the preaching of the forgiveness of sins (Luke 24, 47) or the forgiveness of sins in Baptism or the administration of external Church discipline does not correspond to the natural sense of the text. The Council of Trent authentically clarified the passage as against the forced interpretations of the Reformers, and took it as referring to the real forgiveness of sins in the Sacrament of Penance. D 913; cf. 2047.
The power to forgive sins was not conferred on the Apostles as a personal gift or charisma, but was transferred to the Church as a permanent institution. It was to pass on to their successors, just like the power to preach, to baptise, to celebrate the Eucharist, because the ground of its transference, the fact of sin, makes the continuance of this power necessary for all times. D 894: apostolis et eorum legitimis successoribus. Cf. D 379.
§ 4. The Testimony of Tradition
1. Testimony of the First Two Centuries
The oldest extra-biblical Christian writings refer only in a general way to the necessity of Penance, the confession of sins and the forgiveness of sins, without specifying that they refer specifically to the Sacrament of Penance administered by the Church.
The Didache exhorts to Penance and to the confession of sins before the celebration of the Eucharist, 141: “Assemble on the Lord’s day, break bread and give thanks, having previously confessed your sins, so that your oblation may be a clean one.” Cf. 10, 6. The confession of sins, therefore, should be made “in the assembly of the community,” that is, publicly (4, 14). Apparently this refers to a general confession of sins, such as was customary in the Jewish divine service, similar to the modern “confiteor.”
St. Clement of Rome (about 96) exhorts the agitators of Corinth “to be subject to the presbyters and to accept discipline to penance, bending the knee of the heart” (Cor. 57, 1). As the penance is imposed by the presbyters it appears that an ecclesiastical penance is meant.
St. Ignatius of Antioch (+ about 107) announces the forgiveness of sins through the Lord, to those who do penance: “The Lord forgives those who do penance /419/ when they return to unity with God and to the communion with the bishop” (Philad. 8, I; cf. 3, 2). The forgiveness of sins by the Lord presupposes the performance of the penance and the reconciliation with the Church.
St. Polycarp (+ 156) exhorts the presbyters: “to be gentle and merciful towards all, not strict in judgment, knowing that we are all debtors of sin” (Phil. 6, 1).
Pastor Hermae, an apocryphal apocalypse which emerged in Rome about the middle of the 2nd century, speaks of certain teachers who maintain that there is no other penance but baptism. Hermas approves of this standpoint as a Christian ideal, but stresses that there is still another penance after Baptism for those who have fallen into sin. This penance is general — even sinners
against chastity are not excluded (Mand. IV 1), but only once: “If anyone after that great and sublime vocation (= Baptism), tempted by the devil, sin, he has penance once and for all (Greek); but if he keeps on sinning and doing penance, it avails such a person nothing; for he will hardly live, that is, the Church does not admit him to reconciliation a second time, and he will attain salvation with great difficulty only (Mand. IV 3, 6).
That the way to penance is open to all Christians who fall into sin was taught also by St. Justin (Dial. 141), St. Dionysius of Corinth (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. IV 23, 6), and St. Irenaeus. The last-mentioned reports many cases in which sinners against chastity and people lapsed from the Faith were re-accepted into the Church community after the public confession of their guilt and after the performance of penance (Adv. haer. I 6, 3; I 13, 5 and 7; IV 40, 1).
(To be continued)
————————–
The Sunday Sermons of the Great Fathers
M. F. Toal
THE GOSPEL OF THE SUNDAY
Luke xi. 14-28
At that time Jesus was casting out a devil, and the same was dumb: and when he had cast out the devil, the dumb spoke: and the multitudes were in admiration at it: But some of them said: He casteth out devils by Beelzebub, the prince of devils. And others tempting, asked of him a sign from heaven. But he seeing their thoughts, said to them: every kingdom divided against itself, shall be brought to desolation, and house upon house shall fall. And if Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because you say, that through Beelzebub I cast out devils. Now if I cast out devils by Beelzebub; by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if I by the finger of God cast out devils; doubtless the kingdom of God is come upon you. When a strong man armed keepeth his court, those things are in peace which he possesseth. But if a stronger than he come upon him, and overcome him; he will take away all his armour wherein he trusted, and will distribute his spoils. He that is not with me, is against me; and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through places without water, seeking rest; and not finding, he saith: I will return into my house whence I came out. And when he is come, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then he goeth and taketh with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and entering in they dwell there. And the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. And it came to pass, as he spoke these things, a certain woman from the crowd, lifting up her voice, said to him: Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. But he said: Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.
ST CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA, BISHOP AND DOCTOR
Exposition of the Gospel
And he was casting out a devil, and the same was dumb. The man here spoken of as being without certain senses we would describe as speechless; for his nature was not afflicted. He suffered rather from a trick of the devil, by whom his tongue was as it were tied. So he needed to be brought forward by others: since without a voice he could not plead for himself For this reason the Lord does not inquire into his faith, but straightaway cures his affliction; and the multitude were in admiration at it.
And when the man had been delivered, and the miracle wrought, the people began to praise Christ, with praise such as befitted God. But some of them, the Evangelist says: (and these were from the Scribes and Pharisees, whose hearts were filled with desperation and jealousy) made as though to regard what had happened as simply a stage in the course of the disease. For seeking to detract from the wonders He wrought by divine power, they began to attribute them to the power of the devil; for through him it was, they said, that the Lord cast out devils.
And thus Christ, though He had as it were cast into the abyss the spirits of evil whom He had forced unwilling from the bodies they possessed, and where they had dared to rule; and though for this He was worthy indeed of praise, yet He did not escape the tongues of those who love to belittle, and those of evil speaking men. For twisting the miracle into a crime they say: He casteth out devils by Beelzebub.
And others tempting him, asked of him a sign from heaven. Others urged by the goad of jealousy asked of Him a sign from heaven, almost saying: ‘You have driven out an evil spirit from a man, but that is no great wonder. And neither does this show you have divine power. We have seen nothing yet like the miracles of old. Show us something that no one can doubt is from above. Moses led the people through the midst of the sea; making the deep passable for them. With a wand he struck the rock, and made it the mother of streams: springs rushing from the hard stone. And his successor halted the sun before Gabaon; and the moon above the valley of Ajalon (Jos. xii. 12). He held back the Jordan, and put a barrier before its rushing waters.’ For these men to ask a sign can only mean, that they were turning thoughts of this kind over in their minds as they watched Him. How did Christ answer them?
But he seeing their thoughts, said to them: Every kingdom divided . . . First He shows that He is God by this, that He knows what they had been murmuring among themselves: for He had known their thoughts. For since suspicions of this kind were shameful, and also because they feared the people, they did not give tongue to their grievance against Him, but limited themselves to turning it over in their mind. Then that He might divert their minds from this grievous impiety He answers them, not from the Scriptures: for they paid no heed to them, rather they tried to twist their meaning: but from what is commonly agreed to happen among men.
For, He says, a city, and even a house, if it be divided against itself will soon come to nothing; the same is true of a kingdom: than which men think there is nothing stronger. If I therefore, having in me the power of a demon, by this demon cast out other demons, the kingdom of the demons is divided; whose power if they oppose each other will soon pass away. For it is the union of its people makes a kingdom strong. A house too is strong when its members are no way in conflict with each other. The kingdom of Beelzebub then also remains strong, unless it seeks to do that which works against itself How then does Satan drive out Satan? It is unlikely that it is of their own will evil spirits are driven from men. For Satan does not fight against Satan, nor direct attacks against his own followers; rather he gives aid to his own kingdom. You must then believe that it is by divine power I crush Satan.
They dared, this perverse assembly of wicked Pharisees, to accuse Emmanuel of crime. They dared to slander his honour; and blasphemously they repeat that upheld by the power of Beelzebub He cast the evil spirits out of the afflicted. For this, in times past, Emmanuel had rebuked the unrestrained mouths of the Jews, by the mouth of Osee His Prophet. Woe to them, He said, for they have departed from me: they shall be wasted because they have transgressed against me. And I have redeemed them! But against me they have spoken lies (Os. vii. 13).
If I cast out devils by Beelzebub; by whom do your children cast them out? The blessed Disciples were Jews, and born of Jews. They had received power from God against unclean spirits; and those who were tormented by them they had delivered by the invocation of the Name of Jesus Christ. If then, He says, your sons crush Satan in My Name, striking down his followers, and driving them headlong from the bodies they afflict, how can it be anything but plain blasphemy on your part, coupled with great ignorance, if any among you say that I receive My power from Beelzebub? Your own sons’ testimony condemns you: for they, after they had received My authority and My power, put Satan to flight, driving him out against his will from those he had possessed; while you say that it is by his power I work My miracles!
But if I by the Finger of God cast out devils; doubtless the kingdom of God is come upon you. Since what you say is not true, rather a worthless fabrication, darkened further by slander, it is manifest therefore that it is by the Finger of God that I cast out demons. He calls the Holy Ghost the Finger of God. Christ Himself is called the Hand and the Arm of God (Ps. xliii. 4; Is. liii. I): because through Him the Father does all things. And the Son in turn works through the Spirit. As the finger is joined to the hand, not separate from it, but joined naturally to it, so the Holy Spirit, sharing the same nature as the Son, is joined naturally to Him; though He proceeds from God the Father. For, as I have said, the Son works all things through His Consubstantial Spirit. Now however as man, He says, by reason of My divine purpose, I cast forth devils by the Finger of God. For the Jews, weak and corrupt of mind as they were, could not have endured it had He said He cast out devils by His own Spirit. And note here, I beseech you, that as the Father works His wonders through the Son, it is the Spirit that accomplishes them; but as One and the Same is their Nature, so one likewise is their operation.
Since then the adversaries of the Holy Spirit are driven on every side towards the truth, let them reject the vomit of the deceivers, and turning again to God let them seek from Him the Light of truth, which He being kind and merciful will grant them. If therefore, He says, becoming a man like you, I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, it follows that the nature of man, beginning with Me, has grown rich from the heavenly kingdom. For it has acquired glory in crushing Satan, and in rebuking the unclean spirits. This is the meaning of, the Kingdom of God is come upon you.
And when a strong man armed keepeth his court, these things are in peace that he possesseth. Since it was necessary for many reasons that He should answer remarks of this kind He here uses a clear and striking illustration by which they may see, they who desire to see, that He has truly overcome the prince of this world, and as it were unnerved him, and taken from him the strength he once had, and given his possessions to His own friends. For, He says, as long as he had power, and kept guard over what he had, he feared no violence. But if someone stronger suddenly attack him, and overwhelm him, he is then defenceless.
This is a parable based on what happens among men; but the same has befallen the devil, the hater of good, who, before the Coming of the Saviour, did indeed enjoy great power, seizing on the flocks that were manifestly not his, but belonged to the God of all things; shutting them in, and as it were keeping them in his own fold. Then later the Word of God, the Giver of all strength, the Lord of Hosts, being made man, assaulted him and deprived him of his armour, and gave to others all that he had possessed. For those he had held fast in atheism and error are now through the holy Apostles called to the knowledge of Truth, and because of their belief in His Son they have been restored once more to the Father.
He that is not with me, is against me; and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth. For I have come, He says, that I may snatch everyone from the hands of the devil, that I may deliver those who were captives, give light to those in darkness, raise up the fallen, heal the bruised, and gather together in one the children of God he has scattered. But it is otherwise with Satan, who is not with Me, but strives to scatter what has been delivered and gathered together. How then should he who is at war with all I do give help to Me against himself? Is it not great folly to believe that this could happen? And how it came to happen to the Jews to fall into such thoughts He then goes on to explain.
When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through places without water. That this similitude is directed against the Jews Matthew has already told us where He says: So shall it be also to this wicked generation. For while they were in servitude in Egypt, living after the manners and customs of the Egyptians, and abounding in every impurity, the unclean spirit began to dwell in them. Afterwards, by the mercy of God they were delivered through Moses, and had the Law as their guide and teacher, and through this they were led to the knowledge of the True God, and the impure and evil spirit was cast out from them. Then sacrificing a lamb, the figure of Christ, and being sprinkled with its blood, they escaped the Destroying Angel. But because they refused to believe in Christ, and turned from their Redeemer, the spirit of evil has again possessed them, and has enslaved them more cruelly than before. For he found their heart empty, and void of all concern for the things of God, and wholly taken up with the flesh, and so he took up his abode in them. For just as the Holy Spirit, when He finds the heart of man free of all uncleanness, enters in and abides there, and there takes His rest, so the unclean spirit takes up his abode in the souls of the wicked. For they are, as I say, empty of all virtue. And in this way it comes to pass that the last state of Israel is worse than the first. For, as the Saviour’s Disciple says: It had been better for them not to have known the way of justice, than after they have known it, to turn back from the holy commandment which was delivered to them. For that of the true proverb has happened to them: The dog is returned to his vomit: and the sow that has washed to her wallowing in the mire (II Pet. ii. 21, 22).
And from what they afterwards dared to do, it is plain to see that they have swallowed their vomit, and turned again to wallow in their ancient mire, and relapsed into the errors of Egypt. For the evil spirit has again entered them, and their last state has become worse than their first; in accordance with the words of our Saviour, Who with the Father and the Holy Ghost lives and reigns world without end. Amen.
———————–
ST MARTIN, ARCHBISHOP OF BRAGA (A.D. 579)
ST MARTIN OF BRAGA is said by St Gregory of Tours to have surpassed in learning all the scholars of his age, and the Christian poet Fortunatus described him as having inherited the merits as well as the name of St Martin of Tours. His early history is uncertain. The story that he was a native of Pannonia is possibly the mistake of some scribe who confused him with St Martin of Tours. He is said to have made a pilgrimage to Palestine, and it was perhaps with returning pilgrims that he made his way to Galicia in Spain. There the Suevi held the mastery and had propagated Arian doctrines. St Martin, however, by his earnest preaching brought Galicia back to the Catholic Church. He began by converting and instructing King Theodomir, and subsequently reconciled many other Arians and lapsed Catholics. He built several monasteries, the principal among which, Dumium, served him as a centre for his missionary efforts.
The Suevian monarchs out of regard for him made Dumium the seat of a bishopric (now Mondoñedo), of which he became the first occupant, and so closely did they attach Martin to their court that he was called “the Bishop of the Royal Family”. Nevertheless he never relaxed his own severe monastic rule of life, and maintained strict discipline in the government of his monks. He was afterwards promoted to the see of Braga, which made him metropolitan of the whole of Galicia, and he held that dignity until his death. Besides his main work as a missionary, St Martin rendered great service to the Church by his writings. The chief of these are a collection of eighty-four canons, a Formula vitae honestae, written as a guide to a good life at the request of King Miro, a description of superstitious peasant customs entitled De correctione rusticorum, a symposium of moral maxims, and a selection of the sayings of the Egyptian solitaries. St Martin died in 579 at his monastery at Dumium, and his body was translated to Braga in 1606.
(Butler’s Lives of the Saints)
_______________
CANA IS FOREVER
COUNSELS FOR BEFORE AND AFTER MARRIAGE
By Charles Hugo Doyle (1949)
Chapter Four: PROXIMATE PREPARATION FOR MARRIAGE
So much for morals (and manners). Let us turn our attention to the problem of social development. In this matter we shall confine our remarks to those things that promote a normal development of human love and to whatever prevents or degrades it.
We have already noted that every child passes through five definite stages on its way from the narcissistic tendency of self-worship to a covert interest in persons of the opposite sex. Psychiatrists term the last stage heterosexuality, which, along with gradual liberation from parental domination and preparation for a life career, make up the triune tasks of adolescence.
Heterosexuality is usually completed when the child reaches the age of fourteen or fifteen but there is no hard and fast rule concerning the exact age. With some it may come earlier and with others later. The important thing is that when the adolescent first feels the desire to seek the company of persons of the opposite sex, he must be aided by parental help and sympathy. Any parent who throws an iron curtain around a son or daughter in a shortsighted, selfish attempt to protect him, rather than to educate him for living, does more harm than good. Remember, the little boy of five who ran to his mother for protection from a belligerent female of four will suffer if the same sort of protection is forced upon him at sixteen, seventeen, or eighteen. His Catholic education, his frequentation of the Sacraments, his moral development should help him to stand on his own feet during his social development. This does not mean that youths should be turned loose with no supervision and no notice taken of the company they keep or the hours they come in at night. Far from it. It means simply that new and more advanced methods of achieving protection must be used in place of those employed when the child was of preschool or grammar-school age.
The moral development must be continued by all means with renewed zest during adolescence, for this is the very time in the youth’s life when he or she is given to brooding over religious misgivings. Such doubts and difficulties must be met with deep sympathy, patience, and frankness. The penny catechism method of question and answer must give way to meaningful concepts of sound moral and dogmatic essentials. Generalized religious teachings will be adequate for children up to teen-age, but from then on a specialized instruction is required if the adolescent is going to carry into adult life a knowledge of what is right and what is wrong and the development of the desire and determination to do right.
When adolescents begin high school it is time for them to know all the pitfalls and dangers of this period of life and the inadvisability of allowing their affections to be settled upon any one particular person. Should particular friendships develop at this time an interesting and distracting program of activities ought to be engaged in to divert attention, such as basketball games, tennis, handball, excursions, picnics, fishing, hunting, or photography.
The last two years in high school are particularly dangerous years. These might be termed the puppy-love years. Undue anxiety and opposition during this period then may do more harm than good. It is much more sensible to endeavor to launch the teen-age boy or girl into proper social contacts with those of the opposite sex.
The symptoms of the development of the romantic urge are usually quite obvious. When a boy starts to wash up to his wrists and down to his collar line, shines his shoes, and starts polishing down his hair with machine oil, it’s happening. When a teen-age girl raids mother’s lipstick and cold creams, stands staring into a looking-glass, finds the furniture old-fashioned and father more so, the battle is on.
Fortunate were you beyond estimation if Providence gave you understanding and intelligent parents who were wise enough to help in your social development rather than hinder it. Had your parents “kidded” about your first dates, two unhealthy conditions might have resulted: their attitude might have made you crawl back into a shell or made you defiant and rebellious. Equally great damage could have been done you had your parents been, on the other hand, too anxious to force your social development.
Katherine W. Taylor notes the following factors as interfering with one’s achievement of good social development: “Homes lacking in affection, homes deviating too widely in cultural levels, failure on the part of girls to be modishly attractive, and on the part of boys to grow rapidly enough for successful participation in sports.” It is noteworthy that favorable social adjustment follows a more or less set pattern. Generally, one starts out with a “yen” to belong to a club, gang, or group, and then, gradually, a close and intimate association with one person is substituted. As the capacity for love develops and matures, the desire for single dating appears and the desire to “go steady” with a very special friend develops. These first attachments are usually not very permanent, but they play an important part in one’s development.
Modern adolescents need not take too seriously the charge that they are a lost generation. The oldsters of every age have thought their youths were the worst ever. A cuneiform fragment found in the ruins of Babylon bears this ever ancient, ever new comment: “Alas! Alas! times are not what they used to be.”
A certain lady writing in 1817 about the youths of her day said: “Nothing like the young people of today has ever been seen. They make one’s hair stand on end. They have neither manners nor morals.”
Today, we hear tirades about the apparent insanity of our bobby-soxers and their overwrought hero worship. But every age has had a swoon-gang! Franz Liszt, the piano virtuoso, was the Frank Sinatra, the Van Johnson of his day. Women and girls went to his concerts equipped with knives and scissors so that they could rush onto the stage and snip off a lock of his hair. Even the water in which he washed his hands was bottled and sold to admirers. His cigar butts were worn as prized lockets.
“Humanity,” says Donn Piatt, “is about the same the world over—the same in every age; and while the earth has its uniformity, with slight differences in mountain and plain, so its products are very
nearly alike.”
Accepting the fact that our age presents new problems to youth, granting that our generation has more than its share of problem children and even bad boys and girls, this much must be stated clearly and definitely—that the adolescents who go wrong are usually the ones who are seeking the love they have been denied at home or are those who have not been conditioned for right living.
Here are some timely and important directives to teen-agers. Every youth should have a rigid code of rules if he or she would blossom into a mature person capable of selective choice of a life mate.
Girls should not cheapen themselves by engaging in a conversation with a boy who is so uncouth as to think a two-toned whistle or a “Hiya, babe!” constitutes an introduction. The boy who stands by the school fence ogling girls as they pass is not worth knowing.
Don’t accept a lift in a car from a stranger, no matter how movie-actor-like he looks. Be constant in this. Say “no” and mean it. Girls who can be picked up by strangers are usually “just pick-ups” and will be treated as such.
Don’t “hang around” the usual city or small town haunts. When you go out, have some definite place to go. Don’t dress as if you did it just to attract attention. Too much make-up, too daring clothes, no place to go and nothing to do but stand or sit around somebody’s “sugar-bowl” or hot dog stand, will mark you as a “fast, stupid dame.”
Girls should avoid the companionship of boys who tell smutty stories or who blaspheme. A person who does not respect your company will not respect your moral principles. A girl I knew was with a group when a smutty story was started. “If you’ll excuse me, I’ll go home,” she said. “I would step around a puddle so as not to get my feet dirty, and I like to take the same care of my mind.” I was impressed to no end.
Beware of the boy or girl who must have a drink to achieve the mood. The sought-after teen-ager is the one who dares to be different, and it is during your first dates that you must keep your wits about you and look forward to the time when you will have to make a final decision about a mate. Courage and a plain coke will do more to make you sought after than all the giggle water in the world. The girl who needs a highball to bring her out of her shell is a poor bet for an interesting companionship. Remember always: The teenager who drinks is a boy or girl who lacks the courage to be different. Write that in your diary and make it a guiding principle throughout your whole life.
Teen-agers, as we said before, ought to exert every effort to keep from falling in love with anyone. Wait until you are twenty-one for that. You will have a whole new set of guiding principles at that age. Buzz around and meet new friends—be ladylike or be a gentleman, as the case may be, and enjoy youth as God intended it to be enjoyed. How true is the saying: “Youth is such a wonderful thing it is a shame to waste it on youth.” Don’t waste yours!
Above all, be careful of the amorous companion. Teen-age kissing, petting, necking or love-making is dangerous and should be a warning signal to give such a companion the brush-off. Such things show definitely that the instigator of amorous demonstrations is emotionally immature and that he or she is selfish and weak-willed. The teen-age “Necker” is well on the way to becoming a Kinsey Report statistic. Love knocks less often at a door that is wide open.
(To be continued.)
————————-
Father Krier will be in Albuquerque, New Mexico, April 5. He will be in Pahrump, Nevada, April 7 and Eureka, Nevada, on April 21.
————————-
The topics of Faith and Morals will correspond to the Roman Catholic Faith in Tradition and the Magisterium. The News will be of interest. The commentaries are for the reader to ponder and consider. The e-mail address will be for you to provide thought for consideration. The donations will be to support the continuation of this undertaking.
While the Newsletter is free of charge it is not free of cost. Please consider supporting St Joseph’s Catholic Church with a tax – deductible donation by clicking the secure link: Donate
Or if you prefer send a check to
Catholic Tradition Newsletter
c/o St Joseph’s Catholic Church
131 N. 9th St
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Visit us on the Worldwide Web: http://stjosephlv.org
e-mail news and comments to: tcatholicn@yahoo.com