THE PROBLEM WITH THE OTHER SACRAMENTS
BY
Rama P.
Coomaraswamy, M.D.
Introduction
Preface
The Magisterium of the Church and Related Issues
THE PROBLEM WITH THE OTHER SACRAMENTS:
Chapter I General Introduction
Chapter II The Sacrament of Order
Chapter III Extreme Unction
Chapter IV Confirmation
Chapter V What happened to Confession
Chapter VI Baptism
Is Baptism of Blood and Desire a Catholic Teaching?
Chapter VI Essay on Catholic Marriage
The Gates of Hell Shall Not
Prevail
INTRODUCTION
This book is primarily written
for Catholics who are unhappy with the changes introduced by Vatican II and the
post-Conciliar Church. Hopefully, it will enable them to sort out the issues
and to act appropriately as Catholics.
Some of these chapters have been
published separately or are available as essays on this web page. They are
nevertheless included within the body of this text in order that this book can
be presented as an integrated entity.
It is always necessary to establish common ground with the
reader. With this in view I would propose that all Catholics by definition
believe in God; believe that Jesus Christ is God (and man); that Jesus Christ
established a visible Church; and that this Church is what is commonly called
the Roman Catholic Church.
There can be little discussion about the first two
principles for no Catholic as a Catholic can deny the existence of God or the
divinity of Jesus Christ.
What creates confusion in these days is the nature of the
visible Church that Christ established. Its character was quite obvious for
some 1900 years - up to the time of Vatican II. It taught the same doctrines
and used essentially the same "Apostolic" rites and sacraments since
its foundation. These have generally been referred to as the "deposit of
the faith" which it is the Church's duty to guard and reserve
unadulterated till the end of time. This principle is incorporated in the creed
where we say "One, Holy, Apostolic and Catholic" Church. However,
subsequent to this Council changes were introduced in doctrine and rites which
have raised a serious question: "is it the same Church?"
As there is only one God, only
one Jesus Christ, and hence only one Revelation, it is clear that there can
only be one Church. Now the post-Conciliar Church claims to be that Church
despite the fact that this new organization has changed the rites and doctrines
which were inherited from the Apostles and which were held and/or taught up to
the time of Vatican II. It is precisely this which has confused the average
thinking Catholic.
Only two possibilities exist.
Either the "post-Vatican II (also called the "New" and
"Conciliar" Church) has changed from the Church as it existed prior
to the time of this most dubious "council," or the two churches are
one and the same and the "changes" that have occurred are not of a
substantial nature. If one holds that the "
Catholic Church, one is obliged as a Catholic to adhere to
that Church which Christ founded. If on the other hand one believes that the
changes instituted in the wake of Vatican II are insignificant and not
substantial, one is obliged as a Catholic to accept and respect them.
There is much talk today about "the Faith."
Faith of course has two aspects. First of all, it is objective and as such
pertains to the doctrines taught by the Church as part of Revelation. As such
Faith is a "gift." But faith also has a subjective aspect which
relates to our acceptance of what the Church teaches. The Faith (and not some
vague feeling which passes for faith) is important for as
Many Catholics are confused by what has happened to the
Church. Much of the confusion lies in the Catholic desire to be "in
obedience" to the pope who is or should be Christ's vicar or
representative on earth. What is forgotten is that obedience is a
"moral" virtue, and as such ranks lower than the theological virtues
of Faith, Hope and Charity. In other words, obedience is fine, but one must be
aware of just what one is in obedience to. If one is in obedience to a false
faith, one in essence apostatizes from the Catholic Faith. If one obeys a pope
who himself is not in obedience to Christ, one places oneself in disobedience
to our Divine Master.
Anyone who attends the Tridentine Mass or rejects the
teachings of Vatican II, places him or herself in disobedience to the
post-Conciliar popes. This brings us to yet another tactic of those who would
sit on the fence. They claim that the doctrinal changes introduced and
promulgated by Vatican II are "pastoral" and not
"doctrinal," or again, that only the "extraordinary teachings of
the Magisterium" (which are given once or twice in a century) demand our
intellectual assent. Now both the Ordinary and the Extra-Ordinary Magisterium
are part and parcel of the "teaching authority of the Church." Both
demand our intellectual assent as Catholics. What are we to say when we find
that the post-Conciliar "popes" have "magisterially" declared
the documents of Vatican II to be the "highest form of the ordinary
Magisterium" to which every Catholic "must give their intellectual
assent." It follows that anyone who considers himself to be in obedience
to the post-Conciliar hierarchy must accept ALL the teachings incorporated in
the documents of Vatican II as well as all the Sacramental changes subsequently
introduced. They must further abstain from attending the Tridentine Mass or the
"Mass of All Times" as it has been so correctly labeled.
Many Catholics have rejected the
changes introduced. They hold that to refuse to obey a pope who is himself no
longer in obedience to Christ, in no way denies the authority of the papacy. It
is because of their respect for this institution and their knowing that no
Catholic can be saved if he or she is in disobedience to the true Vicar of
Christ, that they refuse to obey an individual who they see as lacking all true
papal authority. According to Plato a king must rule by divine law (i.e., by
enforcing God's laws). Should he command or rule in his own name or by his own
authority (as against God's), then he becomes a tyrant. The same is true of the
individual who sits in Peter's chair.
"One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic." These are the criteria. Is the post-Conciliar Church one with the Church that Christ established and which has been maintained through 19 centuries? This is for the reader to decide. Is it Catholic, which is to say "universal" in time and place or is it a local phenomena established after the close of Vatican II? Is it Apostolic in the sense that it uses the same rites and teaches the same doctrines that the Apostles did? Again, this is a decision that every Catholic must make. Finally, is it Holy? This is hard for individuals to judge. However its fruits are certainly of a dubious nature. Millions of Catholics have abandoned the faith; thousands of priests and religious have abandoned their vocations. Confessions and baptisms are down. Conversions of former Catholics to other religions abound far in excess of those entering the Church. Certainly, it has canonized a enormous number of saints under new and relaxed regulations. But at the same time it has refused to canonize such individuals as Pius IX and Merry de Val, individuals whose canonization process has been completed under the old rules. Little is it realized that the criteria for sanctity have been changed. Instead of the time honored procedures which involved an examination of the life and writings of the individual involved, it is political expediency which is now the fundamental criteria. The "devil's advocate" no longer functions and miracles are no longer required. But all in all, it is not for us to judge of holiness.
And so it is that Catholics must make a choice. It is hoped that these essays along with my book on The Problems with the New Mass will assist them in doing so.
Rama P. Coomaraswamy
PREFACE
The essays in this book were written over many years. Some
have been published in several languages, others have had great difficulty in
being published at all, and have reached friends and colleagues only in
mimeograph form. At the request of several readers I have brought them together
under the title of "The Problem with the Other Sacraments." The title
has been chosen because in many ways they are a sequence to my book on The
Problems with the New Mass published several years ago by TAN.
The first essay is the last written. It deals with the
criteria available to Catholics in these confused times for deciding what to
believe and how to act. It is perhaps the most important essay because
everything that follows flows from the criteria it establishes (or more
precisely, resumes).
What follows is a series of chapters dealing with the
changes in the Sacraments other than the
I am grateful to Father Dominic
Radecki CRMI for his contribution on the changes in the rite of Baptism. The
issue of Baptism is complex. One does not have to be a Catholic to baptize a
Catholic, though of course one must use the correct form and intend to do what
the Church (or Christ) intends. Many Protestant baptisms are valid, and in so
far as most Protestant sects continue to baptize, the need to totally destroy
this rite was not present. However, innumerable and highly significant changes
were made and a multiplicity of different Baptism rites for different occasions
created, each with a host of "options." Underlying these changes are
significant alterations in the understanding of the purpose of the rite. This
in turn may well effect the intention of the officiating minister and hence may
well vitiate validity even though proper form and matter are used.
Each of these chapters have been
read by many traditional priests both in this country and abroad. Their
suggestions, comments and corrections have been incorporated. The list would be
too long for me to name them all. Many of the articles are used in traditional
seminaries in this country,
ÓRama P. Coomaraswamy