“Remember,” declared the Catholic bishop of Wheeling-Charleston (i.e., all of West Virginia), ”that Senator Byrd is now at peace with the Risen Lord and, with his late wife Erma Ora Byrd, is experiencing Perfect Joy.” The friend who sent this commented:
What WONDERFUL news. I am planning on writing to the good bishop to ask for some relics of the newly canonized Byrdus Maximus. I will use them to ask the Senator’s intercession that an Olympic swimming pool may be Federally funded and installed in our school yard. . . . Who needs Dante when we have my most gracious Lord of Wheeling-Charleston?? Indeed, even the Pope is rendered superfluous . . .
It would have been nice if the bishop remembered that we don’t know where anyone winds up, the judgment being God’s alone and He making it on inside information. Even of those of whose faith we feel sure, we have no warrant for believing they entered immediately into Heaven rather than Purgatory (see numbers 1021 and 1022 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church). That is why the process of canonization requires two authenticated miracles even after the Church’s committee has made, after an exhaustive examination, its judgment that the person lived an exceptionally holy life.
Even the Code of Canon Law does not make a judgment about the eternal state of the soul to which the Church denies a funeral (see canon 1184). It is possible that the “notorious apostate” (one of the groups excluded) repented, impending death concentrating the mind wonderfully, but so late or so privately that we have no record. He may not receive a funeral in church, but we may still hope that he avoided choosing to go to Hell, despite the evidence. The same applies in reverse for those we’d like to think in Heaven.
The worst effect of this kind of thoughtlessness, alas all too common among Christians of all sorts, is that it seduces us into sloth. It is the kind of talk that sends one strolling happily down the broad way that leads to destruction, against which Jesus warned us (Matthew 7:13). As the Cathecism (number 1136) puts it:
The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”
Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where “men will weep and gnash their teeth. [The quote is from Lumen Gentium, section 48.]
The story appeared on CatholicCulture.org.
June 30th, 2010 | 12:43 pm
Remind me not to have you write my eulogy.
June 30th, 2010 | 1:04 pm
Well obviously as an Evangelical I have a different take. I believe the entire point of being a Christian is to be certain about one’s eternal destiny – Paul himself had such assurance:
Philippians 1:23-24
“I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far; but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body.”
As did John:
1 John 5:13
“These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.”
What would be the purpose of the gospel if we were left wondering about our eternal fate anyway?
June 30th, 2010 | 1:06 pm
True stuff, all.
And the news media kkkan’t even write truthfully about his life, either. We are living in Wonderland.
June 30th, 2010 | 2:31 pm
I am reminded of Ignatius of Antioch speaking about respecting the bishops: “The more anyone sees the bishop keeping silence, the more ought he to revere him.” (Epist. Ephisians). I am wondering if the reverse is actually valid… Be that what it may, the good bishop perhaps meant it to be a generic, pastoral, and consoling statement to the family. After all, it is a loss to those who love Sen. Byrd. One can argue the Bishop is being pastoral. But where do we draw the line is a subject I leave for more schalary inclined thinker than I. I will simply say3 words…. Catechism, Catechism, Catechim.
June 30th, 2010 | 2:54 pm
I’m quite certain of two things. One is the certainty expressed by the New Testament writers that the Lord bought for me my salvation. The other is the certainty (that Paul and John had also) that I could yet choose not to accept the gift so dearly bought for me. To say otherwise constitutes a sin against the virtue of Hope, the sin of presumption.
I’m fairly certain of a third thing–that the cited bishop has no kkklue about the eternal destiny of Sen Byrd. It’s bad pastoral practice to canonize anyone in this way, even a clever apparatchik like Byrd. Given the many bridges, libraries, and other monuments which share that name in WV, one is tempted to say: truly he already has his reward. (But that would not be good form either.)
June 30th, 2010 | 3:55 pm
I’d also suggest that if this quote comes form the funeral Mass, the general introduction to the order of Christian funerals should get billing along with the catechism and canon law:
“Attentive to the grief of those present, the homilist should dwell on God’s compassionate love and on the paschal mystery of the Lord, as proclaimed in the Scripture readings. The homilist should also help the members of the assembly to understand that the mystery of God’s love and the mystery of Jesus’ victorious death and resurrection were present in the life and death of the deceased and that these mysteries are active in their own lives as well. Through the homily members of the family and community should receive consolation and strength to face the death of one of their members with a hope nourished by the saving word of God.”
That said, I’m sure the attributed comment has a context, and context is kkkey, if you will.
June 30th, 2010 | 6:26 pm
Jack Hudson and Joe DeVet confuse the objective winning of salvation by Christ with the appropriation of that salvation by themselves. None of the passages cited mean that one can know that I myself will be one of the ones who perseveres till the end (see Matt. 25:31).
And St. Paul doesn’t seem to think he has absolute and infallible assurance of salvation (I Cor. 4:4; I Cor 9:27) nor does he tell the Roman Christians such (Rom. 11:22).
What is the point of the Gospel if we can’t have absolute assurance here and now of our final salvation, asks Jack Hudson. I think one answer might be that we might have faith in Christ.
June 30th, 2010 | 9:40 pm
One would think that one’s eternal destiny was more important than being certain about it.
Especially since the three things that last are not faith, certainty, and love.
June 30th, 2010 | 10:19 pm
I guess those dozens and dozens of pro-abortion votes by Sen. Byrd have no relevance for his chance of entering heaven, regardless of what Our Lord said (Mt. 25) about how we treat the least of our brethren.
July 1st, 2010 | 9:59 am
“What is the point of the Gospel if we can’t have absolute assurance here and now of our final salvation, asks Jack Hudson. I think one answer might be that we might have faith in Christ.”
For what? A life of uncertainty?
“One would think that one’s eternal destiny was more important than being certain about it. “
Why would one’s certainty about one’s eternal fate diminish the importance of it?
“Especially since the three things that last are not faith, certainty, and love.”
Well, modern English translates this as ‘faith, hope and love” – the word hope, the Greek ‘Elpis’ means a “joyful and confident expectation of eternal salvation” – not the modern idea of a vague desire that something might be true in the future.
July 1st, 2010 | 10:26 am
A “joyful and confident expectation of eternal salvation” is not the same as certainty.
July 1st, 2010 | 10:40 am
“A “joyful and confident expectation of eternal salvation” is not the same as certainty.”
It’s certainly not uncertainty. :)
Let me be clear in case the differences here are language and not theological.
I can’t say what Robert Byrd’s eternal fate is; I didn’t know the man. I can’t myself say what any man’s eternal fate is because i am not the judge of men’s hearts.
However, I can say, as Paul does, that I am certain the gospel is “the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” If I am one who believes, I can be certain of salvation. My confidence is in the work of Christ, and the free gift he offers, not my ability to appropriate salvation.
July 2nd, 2010 | 1:24 am
#
# Speaking Well of the Dead by George William Rutler (from Crisis, November 1997) – About the tendency to gloss over the imperfections of the deceased in eulogies.
July 6th, 2010 | 10:56 am
Fr. Rutler’s article can be found at:
http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/rutler/06814.html
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact