Road to Nowhere.

Protestant Private Judgement Exemplified – A Review of “A Path to Healing a Nation” by Frances Hogan – Columba Press 2014

One of the perils of running a repository for Church is that once in a while you make what you think is an inspired purchase which upon receipt turns out to be unsalable. I came across the above titled book online while looking for something else and my interest was immediately piqued by the title. I purchased it promptly upon reading the publishers description. The reason for my interest was the books claim to both analyse the crisis in the Church and offer a cure.

The author, Frances Hogan, is described as a lay missionary and educator working in the Catholic Church since the late 1960s. From the age of ten Frances was taught scripture by her parish priest who is stated to have been a scripture scholar of note in the archdiocese of Dublin. During her teenage years she decided to become a missionary having …”promised the Lord to ‘take the Gospel to the ends of the earth’ at the tender age of three when she experienced God personally for the first time”.

The book is set out in two parts; The Problem and The Solution. In her introduction the author declares that it is “painfully obvious to all that the Church is at an all time low today. Fifty years after the Council the wonderful hope aroused by Vatican Two has all but vanished…lay people have been looking over the heads of the leaders directly to Christ and His Mother because of the lack of teaching and direction from the Church. In fact, the silence from the altar is the greatest scandal of all today. The people act as if there is no Church leadership to guide them; they are like sheep without a shepherd, when the leaders should take a strong hand in discerning the truth and dividing right from wrong, but in the absence of this, the people do their best themselves”. This is certainly borne out by the experience of many in the Church today. Where Church leaders are not undermining the Faith they remain silent in the face of attacks on the Church. Ms. Hogan states; “In this book I want to take you on a journey from the troubled Church of today to the renewal of the Church”. So how does she do?

The answer, I’m afraid, is not very well. In point of fact the book was a gross disappointment. I have no doubt, as the author asserts, that Ms. Hogan loves the Church, unfortunately somewhere along the way she has absorbed a very protestant modus operandi when it comes to teaching Holy Scripture. Her approach throughout the book is unbalanced in that she relies heavily on private interpretation of Scripture, and this inevitably results in a skewed understanding of what it is to be Catholic. There are three foundations to Church teaching, Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium. Ms. Hogan focuses on the first, pays lip service to the second and ignores the second and third where the interpretation of Scripture is concerned. This imbalance ruins what could have been a very timely and useful book indeed.

A Tome of two Halves – Part 1 the Problem.
In Part 1 the author analyses the current crisis in the Church but fails to be specific enough when it comes to concrete situations. For example she correctly ascribes the locus of the present crisis to the time of the Second Vatican Council but generalises too much, stating that Satan worked to bring it all about. This will not do. The present chaos is wholly due to a collapse of Faith and this in turn is directly attributable to Church leaders. It is a terrible reality that for some considerable number of years the children of Ireland have been deprived of the Catholic Faith by their own pastors. This, of course, is a worldwide phenomenon, but nonetheless it is wholly inadequate to describe these shepherds as not “the kind of leaders we need”. In truth they are hirelings and perverters of the Truth. This needs stating clearly and stern opposition should be the only response by faithful Catholics to these wolves in shepherd’s vestments. When the Bishop of Killoe, Willie Walsh, admitted a few weeks prior to his retirement that for a large part of his Episcopal tenure he did not believe in God, I wondered at the time how many of his collegial confreres were in the same position. If actions are anything to go by it would certainly seem that a large proportion of them ape his infidelity. Satan works through such men but these agents call for unmasking.

One of the marked qualities of the book is its inconsistency. While speaking in very general terms about the modern leaders of the Church and their less than sterling qualities the author castigates the religious authorities of the 1940s and compares them to the Pharisees.

“These leaders thought it was inconceivable that God could have a different opinion to them! They were about to discover that God was very different from the way that they had presented Him. In the same way our teachers and leaders presented God as a terrible judge to the children of the 1940s. It seemed that the slightest sin would tip us into hell. Indeed it was a mortal sin to skip Mass on Sunday. What kind of a God was this who needed to browbeat His children to worship Him? Could this make us love him?” It’s news to me that the commandments have been surpassed. This example also belies the common modern attitude that Ireland was a repressive and depressing hellhole prior to 1960.

In accurately diagnosing Satanic assault as the cause of the modern crisis the author wanders into credulity and undermines her own credibility by citing as the major evidence for Satan’s personal involvement a book named “Michelle Remembers”, a now thoroughly discredited work written by two ex Catholics in Canada which spawned the ritual abuse crisis in the 1980s.

There is no doubt that the first part of the book diagnoses the problem correctly, however it does so using a methodology which is protestant. This leads her on to suggest the wrong response and this is laid out in part 2.

Rebuilding the Church
The whole of the second half of the book pushes a lay led answer to the problem diagnosed in part 1. Implicit in the admission that the Church’s leaders have failed (and who could doubt it) the author’s recipe is to ignore them and advocate a lay led response to the crisis. While this is an understandable response it is not a particularly Catholic one. The Church founded on Peter and the Apostolic College is hierarchical and not only should lay Catholics depend on them for the sacraments but also for leadership. Christ willed it so. The fact that they can no longer so depend in many cases does not invalidate the premise. The solution is not to clericalise the laity but to pray for and encourage vocations to the priesthood and religious life.

Given that the second part of the book is about rebuilding the Church the author states that the “Church will soon be crucified – maybe not literally – but she will be wiped off the face of the earth in the most painful way possible…The world will rejoice over the death of the Church in its public manifestation. However, it cannot destroy it privately because Jesus promised to be with us even if two or three gathered in His name (Mt 18:20)”. I don’t know quite what she is getting at here but it certainly appears that she does not believe in the indefectibility of the Church as the Church understands it, i.e. that the Church founded on Peter as on a rock will remain until Christ’s return – the pope and those in communion with him, this is a public manifestation not a private one.

As I have stated the language and approach used in the book is Protestant rather than Catholic. To illustrate this consider the following paragraph from the second half of the book;

“It is now obvious that it is not social works by themselves that produces this miracle (renewal of the church) but the manna of God’s Word. This alone can open the people up to the manna of the Eucharist. Since our people today are not fed with God’s Word in any realistic way – being only exposed to the Sunday homily, which may not be scriptural at all – how can they come alive spiritually or have enough knowledge or understanding of God’s ways and God’s will. Without the Word of God they will never have a biblical world view or understand God’s plan of redemption for humanity. “Where there is no vision (understanding) the people get out of hand “(Ps 29:18). We have made the mistake of teaching dogma without evangelising the people first. ‘Faith seeking understanding’ comes after the foundations have been well laid; have come to know the Lord personally and want to grow in closeness with Him. Failure to teach the Word of God ‘in season and out of season’ prevents the nation from recovering, thus the teachers and preachers are responsible for the eternal salvation or damnation of the whole nation”

Now it seems to me that teaching the Faith is the Church’s primary mission and one carried out by her pastors and those delegated by them. The catechism is informed by the Church’s understanding and interpretation of scripture and the collapse of the Church in Ireland is wholly attributable to the neglect of the ‘teachers and preachers’ i.e. the clergy to teach the Faith as set out in the Catechisms of the Church. The author gets it exactly backwards by stating that experience of God precedes the teaching of the Faith.

The major failing of the book is the substitution of reading and study of scripture for catechesis. It is Catholic teaching that the Church interprets scripture and scripture thus must always be read with the mind of the Church. The author states “…Jesus claims that the Word of God reveals the truth about God and our relationship with Him…He alone can reveal His Divine Will to us. Hence knowing these truths will set us free”. However as St. John states in his Gospel, not everything that Jesus did and taught was recorded in Scripture. This is where Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium come in. St Augustine states that he would not have believed the Gospel if he had not been given it by the Church. The Faith that St. Paul says comes by hearing is mediated by the Church. A Catholic should not attempt to discern God’s Will by reading the Scriptures apart from the Church. The Church teaches that we draw closer to Christ through prayer, penance and the sacraments, by which we receive the grace to live the Christian life. This is the normal way for a Catholic to draw closer to God and increase in virtue. Unfortunately you would never learn that from reading this volume.

Twisted Exegesis
Ms. Hogan presents this reviewer with many examples of how reading and studying Scripture apart from Tradition and Magisterium, the other pillars of the Church’s teaching, can land you in a mares nest.

Take this first example for instance, the story of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11. The author states that the Apostle Peter “…excommunicated Ananias from the Church, telling him to take his money with him!…He excommunicated them, both of them –or, to put it differently, they became ‘dead’ to the Church”. Now I have no idea where she got this particular idea as it is quite clear from reading the passage that Ananias died. The version of Scripture used throughout the book is the Jerusalem Bible but the text here is just as clear as the Douay Rheims. “5 When he heard this Ananias fell down dead. And a great fear came upon everyone present. 6 The younger men got up, wrapped up the body, carried it out and buried it. (Jerusalem Bible online) “5 And Ananias hearing these words, fell down, and gave up the ghost. And there came great fear upon all that heard it. 6 And the young men rising up, removed him, and carrying him out, buried him”. (Douay Rheims) There are different opinions among the Fathers with respect to the salvation of Ananias and Saphira, but I know of none that deny they died. St. Augustine states, “I can believe that God spared them after this life, for his mercy is great. . . . They were stricken with the scourge of death that they might not be subject to eternal punishment.” (St. Aug. Serm. cxlviii) St. Benedict, in the 57th chapter of his rule, insinuates that their death was only corporal.

In her exegesis of this passage from Acts the author has clearly deviated from the plain words of scripture and invested it with a meaning completely contrary to the Church’s understanding. This is no small matter. The Profession of Faith of the Council of Trent states,”…I likewise accept Holy Scripture according to that sense which our holy Mother Church has held and does hold, whose it is to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures; I shall never accept nor interpret it otherwise than in accordance with the unanimous consent of the Fathers”. The First Vatican Council reiterated this; “…no one is permitted to interpret Sacred Scripture…contrary to the unanimous agreement of the Fathers”. Miss Hogan has clearly interpreted the passage differently to the Fathers.

Another example; in the story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19:1-10 it is maintained that the people wouldn’t allow him to go near Jesus, “…for he was considered unfit company for him”. She mentions that “Because of the hostility of the people he had no choice but to climb a tree in order to be part of the crowd”. The text is quite clear. “And he sought to see Jesus, who he was, and he could not for the crowd, because he was low of stature”. (Luke 19;3) None of the Fathers mention hostility from the crowd or their considering Zacchaeus unfit company. I can only assume she has imagined these details.

Clericalising the Laity.
The two solutions that Ms Hogan proffers for the renewal of the Church are the assumption of a priestly role by the laity and the private study of Scripture, and given her own eccentric attempts at exegesis and her frankly pseudo protestant modus operandi this nullifies both solutions for any faithful Catholic.

Take the first solution for instance. The author states, “Jesus used His Father’s authority to carry out His work and He passed that authority on to us: for example, when the seventy two lay disciples returned from their first venture into the apostolate they were in high spirits: ’”Lord,” they said, “even the devils submit to us when we use your name.” She is referring to chapter 10 of St. Luke’s Gospel where seventy two disciples are commissioned to go before him “…into every city and place whither he himself was to come.” She continues: “This sending of the seventy two is a crucial text that requires scrutiny today: Jesus did not just send six pairs of Apostles into the ministry; He sent thirty six pairs of laymen into the same work! There were six times more laypeople than Apostles on His team. Jesus told the laypeople that He had given them authority to do what the Apostles were doing.” This is simply not true. The whole idea that these seventy two disciples Our Lord commissioned to ministry were laypeople is denied by the Fathers of the Church. Haydock quoting Tirinus states, “As Moses formerly chose twelve elders as princes and fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel, and afterwards gave to each of these elders six others, to assist them in the arduous work of governing the people, so our divine Saviour chose twelve apostles to govern his Church. He likewise afterwards gave six disciples to each apostle, which makes 72, to serve as priests, and assist in governing the Church”. Cornelius Lapide states in his commentary, “3. Hence, it is clear that there was distinction and difference in the degrees and duties of the priests. For these disciples were not equal in dignity to the Apostles; indeed Matthias, who was, according to Clement of Alexandria, one of their number, was chosen from them to the Apostolate, Acts i. Hence the Fathers teach that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles, and the priests of the seventy disciples. Although, in the early days of the Church, saith Bede, both the one and the other were called Presbyters or Bishops, in the one case to signify the ripeness of their wisdom, in the other case their zeal in the pastoral office”. So the Church teaches that the seventy two disciples were priests not laypeople. Obviously the second solution, study of scripture, is shown to be no solution when the exegesis displayed demonstrates how this can lead to private interpretation opposed and contrary to the Church’s interpretation.

Conclusion
There is no arguing with the author’s assertion that the Church in Ireland is at a low ebb today. I would go so far as to say that the Catholic Faith embarrasses most Irish people who have largely either rejected it completely or modified it (with the assistance of a compliant clergy) thus ending up with local churches which, in terms of belief, are all things to all men. The solution to the Church’s woes however can never involve a denial of its teaching. The solution to the present crisis is not to turn to Holy Scripture ripping it from its ecclesiastical matrix but a return to the traditional practices of the Church. Children and adults need to be taught the Faith as it has been practiced for two thousand years. Nothing less will suffice. The age old liturgical practices of the Church should also be returned to as they embody and give perfect expression to that Faith in a manner quite foreign to what passes for the liturgical life in most parishes. Catholic writer E. Michael Jones maintains that the biggest mistake that the Church made in the 1960s was to decide that the world was its friend and that it had no enemies. That has never happened, that will never happen, that can never happen. Christ, who is the same yesterday, today and forever states in John 15:18 “If the world hate you, know ye, that it hath hated me before you.” In order to be saved we must adhere to the Catholic Faith as the creed of St. Athanasius makes clear and this means in our day standing out against the prevailing paganism which surrounds us and to which Ireland, sadly, is returning. The author of this work is not to be followed; we must instead return to a serious study of our Faith, that which like its Master is the same yesterday, today and forever.
Gerard Brady