Pray For Fr. Robert F. Drinan, S.J.

Fr. Robert F. Drinan, S.J., who was the Democratic party's Representative for the 3rd Congressional District of Massachusetts from 1971 until 1981, and whose last major public appearance was as the celebrant of a Jan. 3 Mass at Trinity College in Washington, D.C., honoring pro-abortion congresswoman Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, has died.  He was 86.

Here's the story: The death of Father Drinan

As a congressman, Drinan consistently supported “abortion rights.” Even after he left office, he continued his public advocacy of abortion. In 1996, for example, Drinan spoke in favor of President Bill Clinton’s veto of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban.

The Cafeteria Is Closed has even more details about Fr. Drinan's support of so-called "abortion rights": Fr. Robert Drinan, SJ, dead at 86

MSNBC paints a rosy portrait of Fr. Drinan here: Pioneering Rev. Robert Drinan dies at 86

Pray for him.  He needs it.

O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell; lead all souls to Heaven, especially those in most need of Thy Mercy. Amen.

Libera me, Domine, de morte aeterna, in die illa tremenda, quando coeli movendi sunt et terra. Dum veneris judicare saeculum per ignem. Tremens factus sum ego et timeo, dum discussio venerit atque ventura ira. Dies irae, dies illa, calamitatis et miseriæ, dies magna et amara valde. Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine: et lux perpetua luceat eis.

("Free me, Lord, from eternal death upon that terrible day when heaven and earth shall be moved, when thou comest to judge the world with fire. I am afraid and trembling, on account of the coming judgment and wrath. That day is a day of wrath, of disaster and misery, a great and very bitter day. Grant them eternal rest, O Lord, and may everlasting light shine upon them.")

Requiem æternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis.

(Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them.)

Comments

[FED]

How Could This Priest: Fr. Drinan Serve God
And Be A Congressman At The Same Time!!!??
by F.E.D.

Setting the record straight as far back as the early 70's while working as a reporter and a manager for 16 years at the Beacon Publications,in Acton, Mass., a chain of weekly newspaper and I may add the largest chain in the state of Taxachusetts. Way before Popes or Cardinals or priests. We wrote tons of editorials against Fr. Robert F. Drinan, S.J., being a priest and running for a Congress seat.

Our belief was you should not be a priest and a Congressman at the same time. You either serve God or Congress. Our Point was you should not be a priest and also be a Congressman?? So therefore We called him "Congressman Drinan", certainly not Father Drinan.

Congressman Drinan was furous at our editorials and he even came to our office several times a very angry "MAN"! This very same Congressman who was so far to the left thought we were evil writers, because we were against this man who was suppose to be of the cloth who was supporting abortions. We almost came toe-to-toe with this man. If there was anyone who was evil was this man. All you have to do is look up his voting record!! Do not tell me anything about this man who I knew!!!

I often had wondered why his superiors in Rome allowed him to be a Congressman and a priest at the same time. Give me a break! At the time of the early 70's this was unheard of. The Catholic Church is being destroyed from within the likes of 'The Drinan's.

If anyone on this blog is interested in Drinan's background...Our editorials and articles on him of the 70's can be read at the Hudson Public Library, in Hudson, Mass. You certainly will get an eye opener on this man who called himself a 'Priest'.

To quote below. What took Rome So Long!!!

"He stepped down only after a worldwide directive from Pope John Paul II barring priests from holding public office."

By the way you can also visit "RESTORE THE SACRED" web site at this URL, and feel free to post your opinions.
http://www.gmmy.com/restore/index.html

[averageamericancatholic]

It's interesting that the webmaster for catholic blogs wrote to me that he would like to put a flag next to the sites ranking them on the amount of hatred and anger he sees in them. Mr. Fed would be pretty crimson on that scale I think.

I think most American Catholics have come to grips with abortion and hypocritical right-wing haters who holler (actually, bleeding heart might work don't you think) about the sanctity of human life as applied to a fetus while remain silent relative to the soul of a 20 year old getting sent off to die in a war Pope Paul II condemned himself. Most Catholics feel that they have every right to take Communion whether they are Pro-Choice or Pro-Life. By that same pretzel logic, irrespective of what a German Cardinal has written, people supporting the Iraq war should be denied
Communion.

The important point here, which none of the right-wingers get, is that we American Catholics are not going to be dictated to or pushed into voting or behaving the way the GOP thinks we should. If there is actual evil being done here you may want to look closely at the seething corruption and lack of true morals existing on the political right.

AverageAmericanCatholic

[Donald]

So, Average,

Am I to assume that you speak for "most American Catholics" irrespective of the teachings of Rome? In other words, a "fair haired" Catholic? I'm not certain, but, I think the teachings of the church STILL condemn the issues you accept as "average" and that logic makes you, say, a Protestant...The receipt of the Holy Eucharist is "conditioned" on the acceptance and living by the principles of the Church...not "fair weathered"...my two cents worth...I don't really see the Church as liberal or conservative based...I see it as "black and white".

[Karen]

I'm glad that congressman is finally meeting his Maker. Drinan has a lot to answer for.

[TheTruthHurts]

Ah Yes. . . PRAAAAY, PRAAAAY, Fellow Compassionate Conservatives! PRAAAY for his soul! But first things first: get about the business of judging and slandering him. You know his mind, his soul, his heart and it's your Christian duty to JUDGE! Condemn with all the self-righteous hatred in your soul! A DemocRAT! From Taxachusetts! Fratranized with Pelosi the San Francisco Librul!PRAAAY! PRAAAY FOR HIS SOUL!!!

[carolg]

Average,

Being a Republican is not a virtue. Most of the Catholics I know seem to understand that so I’m not sure with what wide brush you are painting when you are addressing “hypocritical right-wing haters”. Additionally, there are many Catholics who are against the war for the simple reason that they do not feel it was morally justified. This post is about a Catholic priest who supported abortion. You are the first to bring up the war.

There is a huge moral difference between the current war and abortion, which I will try to explain the best I can for you. The Catholic Church teaches that direct abortion is intrinsically evil – that means it’s always wrong and it can never be done. That teaching is part of the highest level of doctrine of the Church – basically it’s not negotiable. The reason for this is that abortion always targets and kills a completely innocent and totally defenseless person. War is not always evil in that in some cases it can be justified – as in the case of self-defense for the defense of the innocent. Reasonable people can disagree on whether or not a certain situation is self-defense or not. But for Catholics to remain in good standing with the Church they are not bound to JP2’s opinion on the current situation in Iraq.

So, there are two things I would like to point out to you. First, not all pro-life Catholics or pro-life people support the current war in Iraq. And second, and most importantly, abortion and war are not morally equivalent.

I know my explanation is brief but I hope it is somewhat helps you understand the difference between the two things you are comparing. Abortion is always 100% evil. It has less to do with politics and more to do with the wisdom of the Church.

[Phil]

Uh, was this priest ever excommunicated? If no, WHY NOT!!!

[Justin]

There certainly was a lot of vociferous argumentation back and forth on the comments to the post about this priest/politician. While we must all admit that his views were completely at odds with Catholic teaching and condemn them, just take the advice of Maximus in his post and pray for this man. Let us never let bad seeds sprout discord among the devout!

[average]

Dear Carolg; thanks for your insight.

My point, which many don't want to accept, is that there are millions of good American Catholics, mainstream Catholics, in the U.S. who have a jaundiced view of certain church doctrines and are going to live their lives as they see fit.
That has always been the case: no two Catholics have ever seen eye to eye with what the church does. The other thing is that it is totally arbitrary for any cleric to make a statement such as: "We may have a diversity of opinion on ANY topic but THIS one". I say if we may have a diversity of opinion on the topic of war then we may have a diversity of opinion on abortion. And, guess what--we do. You may call it blasphemy, I call it balanced. And, the ridiculous ploy to suggest that Communion should be denied someone because they don't buy into something in church doctrine would be laughable if it were'nt for the fact that the right is trying to put the squeese play on both the clerics and the parhisoners in the church. If anything is a sin--that is.

Average

[Thomistic]

Heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas"

Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part, Question 11: Heresy

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

Religious Indifferentism

Pax,

Thomistic

[Jennifer]

I'm just curious what is a Catholic if not one who embraces the teachings of the Church?

Is one a vegetarian if one does not consider hamburger to be classified as a meat?

[average]

Well let's hear it for 2089 shall we?

Tell me you're all saints and follow all doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Doctrine is not truth; Doctrine is the direction a man or men want to take others.
We try to follow it when it makes sense.

Remember what Samuel Johnson said when ridiculed by a woman for being a skeptic?
"Madame, I take refuge in incredulity".

We're humans, not lemmings (well, most of us).

Average

[Thomistic]

Dogma

Truth

Summa Theologica, First Part, Question 16: Truth

Truth Cannot Contradict Truth

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

The Magisterium of the Church

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

86 "Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."48

87 Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: "He who hears you, hears me",49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.

The dogmas of the faith

88 The Church's Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes, in a form obliging the Christian people to an irrevocable adherence of faith, truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these.

89 There is an organic connection between our spiritual life and the dogmas. Dogmas are lights along the path of faith; they illuminate it and make it secure. Conversely, if our life is upright, our intellect and heart will be open to welcome the light shed by the dogmas of faith.50

90 The mutual connections between dogmas, and their coherence, can be found in the whole of the Revelation of the mystery of Christ.51 "In Catholic doctrine there exists an order or hierarchy of truths, since they vary in their relation to the foundation of the Christian faith."52

The supernatural sense of faith

91 All the faithful share in understanding and handing on revealed truth. They have received the anointing of the Holy Spirit, who instructs them53 and guides them into all truth.54

92 "The whole body of the faithful. . . cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of faith (sensus fidei) on the part of the whole people, when, from the bishops to the last of the faithful, they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals."55

93 "By this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth, the People of God, guided by the sacred teaching authority (Magisterium),. . . receives. . . the faith, once for all delivered to the saints. . . The People unfailingly adheres to this faith, penetrates it more deeply with right judgment, and applies it more fully in daily life."56

Pax,

Thomistic

Interesting post. I can’t tell if Thomistic was being facetious when he talks about praying for him. Karen says, “I'm glad that congressman is finally meeting his Maker. Drinan has a lot to answer for.” Certainly, this comment is not about praying for him.

When we die, it is completely between God and the person as to the state of there eternal destination. Most will have an additional time of purification in purgatory. And so what should we do for the souls in purgatory? We should sincerely pray, not smile at the thought that a given person is “answered for.” It is sooo hard to love our enemies, isn’t it? But that doesn’t relieve us from the command.

Let us pray that Fr. Drinan has the light of God’s truth illuminated in his soul and that he chooses to follow that light into the heaven of eternal love. And let us pray that those of us still on earth continue to work to grow the love of Christ in our hearts. Let us pray that we pursue the truth always with thoughts, motivations and actions of love -- all of us -- whether conservative or liberal.

[David1]

That last post was from me, David1.

[Thomistic]

David1,

I was very serious when I asked for prayer for Fr. Drinan.

I wish I had thought to pray for him more often while he was alive, but prayers are never wasted.

Prayers for Fr. Drinan at this time will have been forseen by God while Fr. Drinan was still alive and God could have applied the grace from the future prayers to Fr. Drinan at that time, or Fr. Drinan ould be in purgatory and so prayers for him will help expiate the temporal punishment still due for his venial sins or forgiven mortal sins.

If Fr. Drinan died in the state of mortal sin, his soul went to hell the instant it separated from his body. In that case, prayers for him would possibly be applied to some other soul in need, but I honestly think it's more likely that the grace from such prayers would have been applied by God in anticipation of their being said while Fr. Drinan was alive. God is outside time and space (as well as within it, holding it in being) and so applying prayers that will be said in the future to the present would not present a difficulty for Him.

If a person still ends up in hell, it won't be for the lack of God's grace or God applying the grace of the prayer to the person; it will be because of that person's obstinate will.

Pax,

Thomistic

[Imprimartin]

Average,
"We" = the people you directed your last post at
"follow" = believe even though we may be sometimes/often too weak to enact (but we recognize that it is a failure when we fail to enact)

"We" are not all saints but we do ALL "follow" all doctrine of the church. You may find that incredulous but it's true. "We" all do believe ALL the doctrines of the church.

The fact that there are other "mainstream catholics" that have a "jaundiced view" of doctrine or don't see eye-to-eye with other is irrelevant. In protestantism, your point makes sense. In catholicism, it doesn't.

Just as Jennifer said, 'What is catholic if not enbracing the doctrines of the church?" Average-catholic-agreement, on which you seem to place a particular importance, is irrelevant in catholicism. It doesn't matter that many american catholics have "come to grips with abortion". Right/wrong is not dictated by what we've come to grips with. It's dictated by God through the doctrines of the church.

Do not attempt to redefine the word "Doctrine." Thomistic has put up the definition accepted by the church which "we" ALL follow.

You may not like being called a lemming, but Jesus has called you a sheep. If you dislike that title, then you might want to reconsider calling yourself catholic or christian.

[David1]

Thomistic,
Thanks for your discussion of prayer. I was particularly intrigued by the possibility of our prayer for one person being used on another. Our prayers seem to be like a kind of agape energy sent by us to the Body of Christ which then can be applied as grace wherever God sees fit. Many times our prayers are for specific intentions, but I'm sure God can still take that energy and apply it as grace directed to His ends.

I'm in a ministry where we help people with inner spiritual healing from wounds caused by trauma such as sexual abuse, etc., etc. In every case of healing, it came from a cooperation with grace. But, we have also seen the effects of prayer and healing on the perpretrator when they have not even been involved. It's like our prayers went out and God directed them to the one who caused the pain.

Life is rich and it's a treasure to be in it.

[Average]

I appreciate being enlighted by Thomistic, Imprimartin, David1 and the rest. You've got some valuable knowledge there and I'm grateful for you sharing it with all of us.

This doesn't alter what I see as one's right not to follow every vestige of doctrine whether Catholic, Hebrew or Protestant. I know a young man from Israel, Jewish of course, and his favorite sandwich is bacon, lettuce and tomato. Should we stone him because he doesn't follow Leviticus? Or, rather pray for him that he might find his way to a peanut butter sandwich instead?

The larger picture here, which I'm trying to address, is that conservatives have no right to squeeze priests into denying communion to parishioners because of their view or making parishioners feel guilty because of their views.

Would you be surprised to hear that many priests don't like being attacked by the right-wing telling them who to give communion to and who not to?

If I didn't know any better I would entertain the feeling that some of you would like to see a purge in the Catholic Church. Perhaps all of it swinging to the right; removal of a large percentage of priests who don't obey Eucharistic denial to parishioners; expulsion of nuns who feel the same; half the Catholics in the U.S. removed because they are Pro-Choice.

Many mainstream Catholics see doctrines as guidlines not gospel.

Average

[A VERY OLD MAN]

Mr. Tod Brown:
Even the Mafia wouldn't do what Bishops, Cardinals and Priest have created within the Catholic church.
quote from a priest: "Pope John Paul II, in 1986, asked a commission of nine cardinals two questions. Firstly, did Pope Paul VI, or any other competent authority legally forbid the widespread celebration of the Tridentine Mass in the present day? The answer given by eight of the cardinals in '86 was that, no, the Mass of Saint Pius V has never been suppressed. I can say this, I was one of the cardinals. There was another question, very interesting. 'Can any bishop forbid any priest in good standing from celebrating a Tridentine Mass again?' The nine cardinals unanimously agreed that no bishop may forbid a Catholic priest from saying the Tridentine Mass. We have no official prohibition and I think that the Pope would never establish an official prohibition ... because of the words of Pius V, who said this was a Mass forever." (Cardinal Stickler, May, 1995 in New York)

He doesn't say it has to be in private. He says: "NO BISHOP" may forbid a Catholic priest from saying the Traditional Mass. PERIOD. End of sentence. That's it. No one can forbid it. He did not say that they may not forbid it privately but they can publically. No. They CANNOT forbid it.

[David1]

Average,
I know others will address your post, but I’d like to address it from a different angle. Jesus wanted to be sure the “inside” of our cup is of love. We can all certainly obey the rituals and practices of the Church from a motivation (inside the cup) of pride, fear or a number of other emotions. We can also choose to not follow these practices from an internal motivation of love, anger, disobedience or others. Each of us in on a spiritual pilgrimage to become holy and sanctified and thus be full of God’s love. When that arrives, we may share in the divine life of God.

And so all of us must look inside as we debate the various Church doctrines, dogmas and practices while on our pilgrimage, and ask the question, “Does my views and judgments of others come from love or ego (pride)?” If we reject Church practices, are we doing so from pride? If we judge others for not following practices, are we doing so from pride?

Having said that, there are certain truths that are of God. Since God is the total reality and it is from Him that we derive our existence and our purpose, we cannot make up our own truth. We must seek His truth. One of the roles and duties of the Church as the Body of Christ, is to discern those truths for us all. This Magisterium relies on Scripture and Tradition and is guided to truth by the Holy Spirit. Some of these truths are dogmas and some are practices. If we deny the dogmas, we are denying God’s truth and thus moving away from God on our pilgrimage. If we don’t like certain practices, then we are in another situation. As the Body of Christ united on our pilgrimage, does our rejection of practice damage the pilgrimage? Does our advocacy of changes in practice advance the pilgrimage or also damage it.

You mention abortion as an example. The church has studied this and been guided to by the Holy Spirit that a conceived baby is indeed a “person.” As a person, he or she has the image of God and thus has the dignity, purpose and rights of any person. One of those rights is the right to life. Pro-Choice rejects that the baby is a person before 90 days. Upon what criteria do they reject this?

Anyway, I’ve gone on too long. Please understand that Church dogma and practices are not intended to deny you freedom. They are intended to shine a bright light on the road to the total freedom of salvation and sanctification. Yes, some people in the Body of Christ will use doctrine and practice to judge you and club you in the head. But please don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Blessings to you.

[carolg]

“If I didn't know any better I would entertain the feeling that some of you would like to see a purge in the Catholic Church. Perhaps all of it swinging to the right; removal of a large percentage of priests who don't obey Eucharistic denial to parishioners; expulsion of nuns who feel the same; half the Catholics in the U.S. removed because they are Pro-Choice.”

Average, what I would really love is for all people who support abortion in their hearts or in action to learn to love the wisdom of the Catholic Church – especially if they call themselves Catholic.

I don’t want a ton of people leaving the Church that Christ suffered and died for, and offers them the abundance of graces we all need for our Salvation. Christ would want us all to follow his Church that He suffered and died for too! He said those who love me will obey my laws . . .He wants all of our love.

I hope that what you will come to terms with is that the Catholic Church is not out there trying to be some kind of party-pooper that doesn’t want anyone to have fun and that’s why it’s against abortion. Christ and His Church want to keep us away from things that will hurt us. The fall-out from abortion is huge and some women pay a bigger price than others. I’ve seen it first hand. I have very dear friends who suffer silently from their former choices and have deep regrets. And there is an innocent and defenseless person who dies for no other reason than their existence is inconvenient to others. What kind of a society allows that?

The teaching of the Church, that I take you reject, is in place for the benefit of us all – women, babies and men. You see it as some kind of restriction but don’t you want to have guidance to stay away from things that are so destructive?

[carolg]

As a final thought I would just like to say that it is very sad to many of us that the beauty of Church teaching that David1, myself and others write about was rejected by a priest - who is supposed to be 'Another Christ'.

That's what this post is about and that's why we pray for this priest.

[Average]

David1, Thanks.

I'm concerned not so much with dogmas or doctrine as I am with the few who would press the church to have it behave, outwardly and severely, toward it's people just to suit their own agenda. I know that there are many groups who's entire existence is to push the church to deny communion to those who are Pro-Choice.

When then Cardinal Ratzinger placed into doctrine his line about "diversity of opinion except...", do you not think he was under constant pressure from the right to have this accomplished?

So, it is fair to suggest that pressure groups, just like lobbyists here in Washington, continually brought this subject up before this honorable Cardinal to make a stand on this topic?

Could he not just as easily have said "people may have a diversity of opinion on any subject except war..."?

The difference being, as it so often is, which group is doing the pushing within the walls of the Vatican.

Doctrine can be swayed by more than the Holy Spirit it can be driven by people who have an agenda of their own.

My sole stance, here, is that if you are pushing a cleric to deny communion to another for their belief--then you are in the wrong and deserve, yourself, to be called out as one being destructive.

Average

[Average]

David1, Thanks.

I'm concerned not so much with dogmas or doctrine as I am with the few who would press the church to have it behave, outwardly and severely, toward it's people just to suit their own agenda. I know that there are many groups who's entire existence is to push the church to deny communion to those who are Pro-Choice.

When then Cardinal Ratzinger placed into doctrine his line about "diversity of opinion except...", do you not think he was under constant pressure from the right to have this accomplished?

So, it is fair to suggest that pressure groups, just like lobbyists here in Washington, continually brought this subject up before this honorable Cardinal to make a stand on this topic?

Could he not just as easily have said "people may have a diversity of opinion on any subject except war..."?

The difference being, as it so often is, which group is doing the pushing within the walls of the Vatican.

Doctrine can be swayed by more than the Holy Spirit it can be driven by people who have an agenda of their own.

My sole stance, here, is that if you are pushing a cleric to deny communion to another for their belief--then you are in the wrong and deserve, yourself, to be called out as one being destructive.

Average