It would seem that...
I can't think of a letter better calculated to drive her into formal heresy.
I hope these stipulations don't apply to the making of comments box remarks.
Most of us have no staff.
But bitterness, snideness, and invective—take away these, and what've we got?
Sweet Reasonableness? ;)
If he would have taken the time to explain the issues surrounding her actions in clear logical term, he may have had some effect. Even is someone is wrong--as she clearly is--that doesn't mean that you can treat her disrespectfully. Like Patrick just said, there aren't many better ways to drive her further from the Church.
I hope these stipulations don't apply to the making of comments box remarks.
Of course not. This is the Internet.
I may be idealistic, but I'm not stupid.
It's not just driving her into formal heresy that gets me. It's the large number of people who will eagerly volunteer to chauffeur her there.
Even if an amputation were necessary, I wouldn't want my doctor to rub his hands together gleefully just before reaching for the saw.
Vivid analogy, Tom. Ha! An even funnier one might be to compare Father E. to Steve Martin as the dentist in "Little Shop of Horrors."
Isn't there also some theological error, beyond the pastoral error, in the ushering of a baptized Catholic (however confused/wrong/unfaithful) out the door in this manner?
I seem to recall Minute Particulars talking about something like this as not taking the sacrament of baptism as seriously as it should be taken.
There is, perhaps, a bit of overzealous youthfulness in Fr. Euteneuer. He's a bit younger than I'd thought:
http://www.hli.org/our_president.html
Don't forget the ecclesiological and canonical errors (for starters: he's not her bishop and she's not an apostate, respectively).
Offhand, I can't see why it wouldn't in principle be possible to answer the idiocies of the congressmen's letter without introducing additional idiocies into the mix. In practice, it seems to be very difficult.
I remember reading an interview with Barney Frank in the Post a few months back in which he said that if you engage in political tactics that feel really, really good, it's probably not the right approach. Father E is probably the last person who would ever accept advice from Frank, but the advice itself is pretty sound. (Of course, being a snarky Congresman and all, Frank doesn't always follow his own advice).
Actually I now agree with your opinion of the letter.
While a part of me liked the tone of the letter, I also agree that as a public letter it seems to totally lack in charity.
Sometimes after seeing statements made that are so weak we long for the opposite, yet rhetoric such as this is over the top and my initial positive reaction to this letter was wrong.
There's also this press release, in which Fr. Euteneuer is quoted as saying:
"I have one very simple suggestion for all 'Catholic' Pharisees who want to be in the Church but not of the Church: spare us all your scandal mongering and get the hell out."
This was released on May 24.
So maybe his May 28 letter was heavily edited from its first draft.
In fact I updated my post and linked back to your analysis.
Thanks Tom.
This does not sound like the Fr Tom Euteneuer from South Florida.
Really ugly. The final paragraph stinks.
And I have the sad impression -sorry if i'm doing injustice- that this spirit pathos is not atypical of HLI...
>While a part of me liked the tone of the letter, I also agree that as a public letter it seems to totally lack in charity.
Speaking for me, i'd said:
While a part of me at liked the tone of the letter, I know for sure that that is my worst part.
I agree with Tom's take on this letter, but perhaps Fr. Euteneuer should start a blog. I mean, where else does prose such as this rightly belong but the blogosphere?
"The door of the Church that opens wide to welcome every repentant sinner swings both ways. In the Name of Jesus, use it and spare the rest of us your perversity."
Our Lord left us a parable to guide us when Catholics go wrong and we are tempted to weed them out. It's in Matthew 13:24-30 (Christ explains its meaning in v36-43).
When the servants wanted to weed out the cockle (bad weeds growing among the good wheat) the master replied "No, lest perhaps gathering up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it".
God Bless
If you have never felt temporary satisfaction in reading or writing something like Fr. Euteneuer's letter, please pray for the rest of us.
And all of us should pray for the spiritual health, as well as the practical success, of those engaged in pro-life apostolates.
I bet the lines to his confessional are really short during Holy Week.
Tom,
I find your reaction to Father's reaction the more problematic of the two. What you describe as bitter is more accurately described as tongue-in-cheek humor. Fine if you don’t appreciate that style and would use other methods yourself but the letter itself was not primarily instructive in nature. It was an attempt to challenge Ms. Pelosi to be accept the faith or admit what is clearly manifest. Father nor anyone else can chauffeur her into heresy...(really now) she’s already there by her the power of her own loco-motion.
The real scandal here is that she and other like her (Kerry, Kennedy, Cuomo) aren’t disabused of their ability to abuse the Faith by publicly calling themselves catholic.
Paul
Paul:
Do you mean that Fr. Euteneuer's letter was really meant to be tongue-in-cheek?
As a matter of fact, Paul, no, I don't appreciate invoking the Holy Name as part of an exercise in tongue-in-cheek humor.
But then, I don't think "tongue-in-cheek humor" is an accurate description of this letter. "Faux-intellectual sarcasm" is more like it. Neither is appropriate for a public letter from the president of a Catholic organization.
And spare me your "real scandal" grandstanding. The real scandal is that Christ died for our sins and none of us really gives a shit, but we're talking here about an embarrassingly unprofessional letter that can have no positive effect on pro-life efforts in the United States.
Maybe he can get a late-night talk show on NBC and become the Sam Kinison of Catholicism. We better call EWTN quick so they can sign him up.
Tom,
As I've said before one man's "faux-intellectual sarcasm" is another's tongue in cheek humor. I wouldn't be so quick to judge the less than positive results. I for one am considering a generous increase in my annual donation. I find your reaction is extreme and unwarranted. Aren't you at all concerned about the actual damage done to the pro-life efforts caused by individuals like Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy, Cuomo rather than your own grandstanding on this non-issue?
BTW, I'm not grandstanding...I'm just catholic. Sorry if that wrecks your whole day.
Allow me to rephrase that:
Aren't you at all concerned about the actual damage done to the pro-life efforts caused by individuals like Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy, Cuomo? And in comparison to the actual damage done by them to the pro-life efforts in the US isn't your reaction to Father's letter a bit of grandstanding?
I wouldn't be so quick to judge the less than positive results. I for one am considering a generous increase in my annual donation.
Yes, there is the possibility that this letter will draw additional donations from the sort of people who will send additional donations to the sort of groups that issues letters of this sort.
Fundraising, though, is not the purpose of HLI.
BTW, I'm not grandstanding...I'm just catholic. Sorry if that wrecks your whole day.
What a bizarre thing to write!
Allow me to rephrase that:
Aren't you at all concerned about the actual damage done to the pro-life efforts caused by individuals like Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy, Cuomo? And in comparison to the less tha positive effects on the pro-life efforts in the US doesn't your reaction to Father's letter seem a bit like grandstanding?
Dear Tom,
I found it somewhat less offensive than most; however, I really must wonder about a priest inviting someone to leave the Church "and spare the rest of us your perversity." If everyone subject to some form of perversity were to leave the church, I suspect that the interior echo would be difficult to cope with.
You are correct, I think, in supposing this was written in the white heat of anger. Overall, I think the implicit advise in your note would behoove the good Father greatly.
But I read this all as a sign of his deep passion for his cause. It needs to be tempered with greater charity, but nevertheless, it is a good thing to be passionate about.
shalom,
Steven
Tom, regarding "... is an embarrassment to Human Life International":
That's actually tough to pull off, given some of HLI's past shenanigans, I'm afraid. (E.g., I believe the Vatican had to correct them [together with some others] a few years ago on their overly rigoristic interpretation of the instruction on The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality.)
I found the letter refreshingly frank and to the point, not like some of the "pastoral" letters that make you rub your head and go "what the heck does he mean?!!
What most of the commenters seems to forget is that these 48 legislators support the slaughter of tiny babies in their mother's womb and use their positions accordingly. I can't imagine that if it were the murder of 1-year-old babies, or the elderly, or homosexuals, or minorities, or the mentally retarded, or any other group, that any of you would demand anything less than the strongest of words of admonishment - especially from a leaderin Human LIFE International.
I'm with Paul - I'm going to send a donation to HLI!!
Part of me is tempted to agree with Paul and Laura, but in the end I can't. The problem with the letter is that the call to repentance seems tacked on compared to the call to leave the Church. The letter gives off the impression that if Rep. Pelosi were actually to repent and become pro-life, Fr. Euteneuer would be filled with Jonah-like disappoint rather than Good Shepherd-like joy.
P.S. Is it really wrong to call the Eucharist "Holy Communion?"
Elena,
I'm sorry that I called you "Laura." I think that I still had a different post from a different site on my mind.
It's OK, I've been called worse! :lol:
I wonder how Fr. Euteneur squares his letter with Luke 6:37 - "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven."
I can't imagine that if it were the murder of 1-year-old babies, or the elderly, or homosexuals, or minorities, or the mentally retarded, or any other group, that any of you would demand anything less than the strongest of words of admonishment - especially from a leaderin Human LIFE International.
Strong words of admonishment: yes.
Falsehoods and distortions: no.
Taunts and sneers: no.
My comments as left on The Curt Jester: (Part 1)
I read Tom's analysis as well and I still think it's a great letter. Nancy Pelosi and others of her 'persuasion' will not be swayed by nice talk regarding Church teaching, morality, reason or logic. Of course, Fr. Euteneuer's letter is harsh - it may be the only language these people understand. Perhaps, God willing, one of them will take heed.
Look at the post above regarding Dick Durbin, for example. These 'apostates' have rejected the faith and continue to do so. They are deserving of contempt for the evil they endorse. They are, however, in need of much prayer so that their minds might be enlightened and in so doing, their hearts and wills will be converted.
....
(Part 2)
The Mystical Body of Christ is being poisoned by heresy and apostacy from within. The cancerous infection should be removed before more succumb to its inevitable death. I suspect many have become desensitized to the rampant dissent and rejection of truth and, subsequently, may be unable or unwilling to confront evil forcefully. I commend Fr. Euteneuer for telling it like it is!
Many times, something like this is needed to 'shock' one who is so addicted or enslaved into seeing the truth so that they may be saved from eternal punishment.
Falsehoods and distortions: no.
I didn't see any falsehoods or distortions. Actually reading that letter would be a lot like walking into a mirrored room, with white lights, completely naked! Some folks need that before they see themselves clearly.
Taunts and sneers: no.
I didn't find it taunting either. It wasn't nice. Wasn't meant to be. Not all the writings of the saints, not all the words of Jesus could be classified as "nice."
I wonder how Fr. Euteneur squares his letter with Luke 6:37 - "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven."
I'd square it this way -
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. Matthew 5:6
Unfortunately, the letter made him sound like a raving lunatic. And more unfortunately, Tom is right in that it will make all faithful Catholic's (that is, all pro-life advocates's) responsiblities more difficult. We will have to convince those we want to have a discourse with that we are indeed NOT a fruitcake.
This just provides ammunition to Satan's culture of death to say: "Look, this is what pro-life movement is composed of--religiously zealous nut who believe that if you don't do as THEY say you will go to Hell." That is not what we want.
We need to ALWAYS be able to calmly explain what GOD want us to do. We must know GOD's position and be able to articulate it without sounding like a 700 Club blooper.
Christ was often direct, but He always treated everyone with respect. As St. Thomas said, God always treats us with respect.
I didn't see any falsehoods or distortions.
Re-read the first paragraph. Pelosi is not an apostate.
I didn't find it taunting either.
"You have lost your faith. Just admit it." isn't taunting?
It wasn't nice. Wasn't meant to be. Not all the writings of the saints, not all the words of Jesus could be classified as "nice."
Which has absolutely nothing to do with any of the criticism that's been directed against the letter here.
Paul, Elena, and LRS:
Thank you for clarifying for the rest of us the meaning of the expression "if it feels good, do it."
Not only do your comments manifest an utterly infantile understanding of public discourse, they were intellectually dishonest in the extreme.
You don't care about how Nancy Pelosi, or anyone who agrees with her, reacts to the letter. Just admit it.
I hold out hope that some day you will see the light and want to reconcile with the Church you have so brazenly misrepresented. If so, email me. I will post your confession. But get ready to feel some serious humiliation.
(There. That may be the only language these people understand. Perhaps, God willing, one of them will take heed.)
(If it makes anyone want to send me money, that would be okay, too.)
Steven:
But I read this all as a sign of his deep passion for his cause. It needs to be tempered with greater charity, but nevertheless, it is a good thing to be passionate about.
Passion for the good is good. Passion unregulated by reason is not.
I was going to write, "If we can't have a near-perfect saint, I'll settle for someone whose gut reaction is as shown, but there's no angle on someone so imprudent as to publish his gut reaction."
But I'm not even happy with "get the hell out" as a gut reaction.
Tom--
I should probably stay "the hell out" of this discussion, but why fight nature?
I would think the matter of allegedly Catholic politicians' votes on abortion rights is of secondary, or tertiary importance. A politician can vote to keep abortion legal but, so far at least, he can't vote to actually abort a baby. There are plenty of Catholics out there, however, who ACTUALLY ARE aborting babies. In my limited experience, I've known of few of those personally. There's your primary problem. Make it illegal, that problem will remain. The secondary problem are the socio-economic and/or selfishness factors that make abortion desirable. Now, at last, having revealed why they vote as they do, we've gotten all the way down to our Catholic politicians...
You don't care about how Nancy Pelosi, or anyone who agrees with her, reacts to the letter. Just admit it.
Not quite. I actually hope she reacts to it as I HAVE WHEN SIMILAR STATEMENTS (which were true) WERE MADE TO ME. Like an electrical shock through the body, like a bucket of ice over the head... did I use the naked in a room of mirrors analogy yet? That too.
Sometimes Tom, the heart is so hardened it needs a good JOLT to get it going again.
On the other hand, your statment isn't entirely untrue either. I care more about the slaughter of the babies that Ms. Pelosi and her ilk ALLOW and SUPPORT than her freely chosen path too hell.
If her feelings have to be bruised a little to save lives - so be it.
Dear Tom,
Yes. I think we agree, and I had hoped to make that clear. Deep passion for a good cause is a very good thing. But the expression of that passion should be such as to be instructive and productive both to those instructed and those observing. I find nothing edifying here, and to hear a priest taunt and tell others to get out of the Church smacks of a holier-than-thou, which while probably objectively valid suggests a profound lack of humility.
So, I think we're on the same track. Still and all, it is good to see passion, even inapproapriately expressed. If this priest is truly humbly following God (as I believe he is trying to do), he will learn through harsh experience how to temper what must be strong language with evident charity. You can correct these errors without belittling the ones who make them. The error, no matter how hideous, is not the precious person whom God loves. The letter did not suggest love, not even "tough love" to me.
shalom,
Ste
I also will throw myself into the fray on this issue...against my better personal judgment.
This whole discussion reminds me in an odd way of the actions of Paul Hill, Eric Rudolph, and the rest. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Granted, it is the responsibility of priests, bishops, etc. to 'keep the flock in line' on Catholic issues, abortion obviously included. But the letter that I read posted by Fr. Euteneuer is almost mean spirited and personal in nature...more a 'take that' condemning type letter than a constructive line of reasoning designed to persuade someone to change their views.
cont'd:
I become worried when people on either side of the abortion issue become so worked up into a rabid discussion, protest, letter writing and worse, that passion begins to take over and reasoning begins to take a back seat. That is when irrational decisions begin to be made on either side of the issue, and violence usually results.
Make no mistake, abortion is murder and needs to be stopped, but personal attack letters like this one will 1)not change anyone's mind (at least not a politicians'), and 2)will only inflame people's tempers and passions to the point that further violence and anger will manifest themselves.
We seem to have forgotten that peaceful protest usually works well in this country...it worked wonders for the civil rights movement. We just need to find enough peaceful protesters in this country to line up for the pro-life movement. Only when the majority of people in this country can be convinced that abortion is wrong in all cases will the issue swing the other way...both with politicians and changes in the laws.
Sorry to take so many comment boxes...1000 words just sometimes ain't enough!
Kudos to Jeff Miller, for being humble enough to admit when he is wrong.
Kudos also to Elena, who proved that she can take it as well as she can dish it.
Kudos to Tom, who is a magnet for disputations.
chuckle I might have to use that quote on my side bar TSO! :)
I recall John the Baptist being pretty passionate about his cause and telling it to Herod the way it is. But I don't recall J the B telling Herod to get the hell out of Jerusalem. I do recall him telling Herod to repent quite often.
Excuseme, but I dont speak english and I'm affraid I've miss the irony(is it?). "And you're a Nazi" is your way to send Fr. Thomas back his "hard words"?. Or It means: "A bit more... and Fr. Thomas can say that"?.
Hope you can understand me.
Thanks.
Excuseme, but I dont speak english and I'm affraid I've miss the irony(is it?). "And you're a Nazi" is your way to send Fr. Thomas back his "hard words"?. Or It means: "A bit more... and Fr. Thomas can say that"?.
Hope you can understand me.
Thanks.
It meant, "A bit more... and Fr. Thomas can say that."
But you are right. It is unclear, and could be read to be aimed at Fr. Thomas.
It meant, "A bit more... and Fr. Thomas can say that."
But you are right. It is unclear, and could be read to be aimed at Fr. Thomas.
Commenting by HaloScan
