Dear Father
Jonathan,
Your letter
to Sean Hannity indicates that you did not know that I
asked to speak to him in private about this matter in
2004 otherwise you may have tempered your remarks about
my supposed lack of charity in dealing with a high profile
Catholic who dissents from clearly-defined and reiterated
Church teachings. [See “Fr.
Euteneuer asks to meet with Hannity about birth control”
on sidebar.] You also seemed to be unaware of the fact
that Sean was the one who invited me on his program
and who then promptly “[threw] civility to the wind,”
refused to display “cultivated intelligence”
on the issues and jeopardized another person’s “reputation
and dignity.” May I also point out that you did
not employ with me the same standard of “fraternal
correction” that you expected me to employ with
Mr. Hannity. I at least made the attempt to speak to him
about this issue in private without success; you, in contrast,
went immediately to the internet to take me to task. I
do not intend to understand your motives; I can only evaluate
what I see in your actions.
The question
that comes to mind is an obvious one: if you are a Fox
analyst on Catholic matters, wouldn’t you have been
the one to have had those “private conversations”
on birth control with Mr. Hannity? How about discussions
on his abortion exceptions? When you told Sean “in
person” that you “disagreed with him,”
was it on the issue of birth control? If you had done
that, I applaud you, but your powers of persuasion may
need a little honing—Sean has only gotten more vocal
on this issue over time. If you did not speak to him about
his public dissent, then I ask you, “Why?”
While we are on the subject, have you also analyzed and
disagreed with Bill O’Reilly’s perfectly horrible
disdain for the Holy Father and the Church that you represent?
The church
sex abuse scandal was not just about homosexual and predatory
priests. It was about clerical negligence and silence
on issues that not only affect people’s souls but
also ruin people’s lives. It is highly unusual that
you or anyone else would want a priest to be silent on
issues that affect the salvation of souls. We used to
recognize “admonishing the sinner” as one
of the Spiritual Works of Mercy, and I consider my admonishment
of Mr. Hannity to have been done in that spirit. I might
also add that in doing so I have fulfilled my duty as
a priest which is a requirement for my salvation.
As a seminary
rector, I would sincerely hope that you are not teaching
by word or example the young men in your charge to be
politically correct sissies who are afraid to roll up
their sleeves and defend the Church in private and in
public. We have tons of those types in the clergy already.
I would advise you to drink deeply of the wisdom of the
Number Two man at our Headquarters who has in no uncertain
terms told all of us that high profile dissenters are
a scourge and a danger to souls. [See item: “Bertone:
Dissident Catholics More Worrying Than Atheists.”
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07011003.html.]
I wish you
fraternal blessings for your priestly work.
Sincerely,
Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer
President
Human Life International
Fr.
Morris’ Letter to Sean Hannity
Dear Sean,
As I watched
a fellow Catholic priest spar with you on the March 9
edition of Hannity and Colmes, I hung my head in shame
and sadness. My colleague in religion (whom I've never
met) used the public airways and Internet to call you
a heretic and hypocrite. Because he chose to do this in
a public forum, I want you and your viewers to know, publicly,
that as an analyst of this television network, I believe
this good priest, who does great work, exercised, on this
occasion, shockingly poor judgment. I consider his willingness
to give his personal opinion about your status within
the Church inappropriate and ill-considered, to say the
least.
Regardless
of the issue and arguments at hand, brandishing law without
palpable love almost always repels. I must assume he just
made an honest mistake.
The unfortunate
event reminded me of the bigger question of the fast-eroding
credibility among religious leaders in our nation and
its causes.
I should start,
or rather continue, at home with the Catholic Church,
your church and mine. As you rightly stated in the same
television segment, the systematic cover-up of sexual
abuse within some sectors of Catholic Church leadership
was a monstrous scandal and its affects will be long-lasting.
Even those priests who were not involved in the mess,
as I am sure is the case with the priest in question,
can never forget that those of us who wear a clerical
collar still conger up painful memories in many people's
minds. The strange looks and rash judgments to which we
are at times subjected is not the people's fault; it's
ours, in as much as we are members of a very guilty family.
In this light,
before we clergy members speak out publicly against public
offenses, as sometimes we must do, we should ask ourselves
and God why we are doing what we are doing, and what the
best way to do it is, according to the circumstances,
and always with palpable love. The question is not only
if what we have to say is correct, but where, when, and
how we should say it. I, for one, would have communicated
my beliefs in a different way on more than one occasion
if I had followed this advice.
I would be
remiss if I were to suggest that the loss of religious
credibility begins and ends with Catholic leaders. When
we hear television evangelists wonder out loud whether
Ariel Sharon's stroke might be God's judgment on him for
making territorial concessions to the Palestinians, we
lose trust. When, year after year, we listen to self-proclaimed
prophets predict the day and the hour of the “end-times,”
we lose trust. When we turn on the television and hear
preachers promise heaven on earth if we give, give, give
to the Church — their church — we lose trust.
When we hear mainline Protestant pastors and their associations
throw Biblical tradition to the wind and make wishy-washy
statements about faith and morality, we lose trust.
The non-Christian
religions are in even worse shape regarding leadership
credibility. Is there a single Muslim imam who stands
out today for his national leadership toward peace? What
Muslim scholar can we trust to speak with scholarly proficiency
and universal authority about the alleged peaceful nature
of Islam?
The Jewish
community in America is so splintered and disjointed on
themes of dogma and religious tradition, it is difficult
to find anyone who speaks for the majority, or even for
the masses.
Here's my point:
When we believe
we have discovered truth and, therefore, we believe others
are wrong — a sign of cultivated intelligence, not
pride — we must reject the temptation to throw civility
to the wind. Being right always didn't ever inspire Jesus
to jeopardize people's reputation or dignity. It went
against his very nature, and it should go against ours
too. Sometimes he spoke harshly, but he always spoke in
love, and he made sure people knew it.
Sean, I don't
always agree with you and Alan, as I have told both of
you in person, but I think you are both honest, and both
have the humility and courage to accept truth when you
stumble across it, even when it comes in bits and pieces.
I think it's precisely this three-pronged attitude of
honesty, humility and courage that best prepares us, with
all of our imperfections, for heaven.
God bless,
Father Jonathan