•cl vfGiQ-^cA^ S> .

AC.V AS'1>5



Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2016

https://archive.org/details/10goodreasonswhy00shor



10 GOOD REASONS
WHY YOU SHOULD
BE A CATHOLIC

by

R A. SHORT

Published by the

BELLARMINE PUBLISHING CO.

Mound, Minnesota

Litho in the U.S.A.



'Dedicated to Ml

Who Seek

Zrue Peace

Of Mind

Md Soul

Nihil Obstat: Walter H. Peters, S.T.L., Ph.D.

Censor Librorum

Imprimatur

:

William 0. Brady, S.T.D., D.D.

Archbishop of St. Paul

The NIHIL OBSTAT and the IMPRIMATUR indicate only that this manuscript

has been read before publication by one who is competent; that in the manu*

script he has found nothing contrary to the faith of the Catholic Church nor to

its moral teachings. In indicating that nothing such has been found there is
no

implication that those who grant the NIHIL OBSTAT or the IMPRIMATUR

agree with all the contents, opinions or statements expressed in the manuscript.



FOREWORD

This booklet presumes, dear reader,
THAT YOU BELIEVE IN GOD. Every sensible per-
son believes in God for every sensible person is aware

that without a Creator there could be no creation. Some-

thing cannot spring from nothing. An omnipotent God
of infinite love and justice simply must be for the great

universe with all its beauty and harmony to be. That is

a rule of logic as basic and as inflexible as two and two

make four. In addition to the evidence of logic the evi-

dence of human experience proves the existence of God.

Often down through the ages man has witnessed actual,

unmistakable manifestations of His Presence, His power

and His loving solicitude. So unmistakable were these

manifestations Job, one of the foremost realists of an-

cient times, was compelled to write: “Only the fool will

say in his heart there is no God.” Today our foremost

men of science are expressing this very same sentiment.
Wrote Albert Einstein: “I admit a humble recognition of

the illimitable superior Spirit who reveals himself in the
slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and

feeble minds.”

Being aware of the Reality of God it is also to be pre-

sumed, dear reader, that you recognize the need for

religion, for a way to give God the adoration and obe-
dience which is His due. Reason insists and justice de-

mands— God himself has decreed— that unless He is
adored and His Will obeyed there will be no sharing in

the great reward of life which is eternal happiness with

Him in the life that lies beyond the grave. We like to
think of ourselves as independent creatures but deep in

our hearts we know that we are dependent creatures,
dependent on God for everything good that comes out
of life—and, of course, the one way of showing our de-
pendency is through religion.

[
3

]



But this conscious need of religion raises a question:

Which religion? In the world there are a variety of re-

ligions. There is Buddhism, Hinduism, Mohammedism

and Taoism, and among the Christian religions there is

Eastern Orthodoxy, Protestantism and Catholicism.

Which of these religions is needed to give one the

greatest possible assurance that God’s Will is being com-

plied with, the best possible guarantee of eternal sal-

vation? Which of these religions would God himself

recommend?

It is not always an easy question to answer, what with

all the claims and counter claims; but it is the author’s

contention, a contention shared, incidentally, by more

people than any other, that the religion most needed,

the religion which can give you the greatest assurance

that you are complying with the Divine Will, is the

Catholic religion. There is a threefold basis for this con-

tention: First and foremost Sacred Scripture, wherein

the bulk of divine prophecy is recorded, provides a

basis; secondly history, wTherein the fulfillment of divine

prophecy is recorded, provides a basis; and thirdly logic,

wherein the affects of religion on people are evaluated,

provides a basis. Put them all together, co-relate them

as they should be co-related, and the justification for

this contention will become ever so clear— consider them
honestly and objectively, without the impediment of

past prejudices, and you will find not one good reason

why you should be a Catholic but TEN good reasons,
the ten good reasons described in the following chapters

of this booklet.



YOU NEED THE

ORIGIN
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Between 2300 and 3500 years ago, the Old Testament
informs us, God revealed on several separate occasions
that He would appear on earth in human flesh to person-
ally effect, through teaching, through a sacrifice of pro-

pitiation for sin and through the establishment of a New
Covenant Church, the salvation of mankind. Man had
fallen into such a depraved state God had to take drastic
measures, had to come personally to man's rescue, other-
wise man would be hopelessly mired in his guilt and have
to suffer the dire consequences—eternal banishment from
heaven.

A little over 1900 years ago God kept His promise; He
appeared on earth in the Person of Jesus Christ.

There can be no doubt that Jesus was in truth the
promised Redeemer—God Incarnate. He fulfilled the di-
vine prophecy right down to the smallest detail: He was
bom in the city of Bethlehem according to the prophecy,
of a virgin according to the prophecy, promulgated divine

truth according to the prophecy, performed miracles ac-

cording to the prophecy, was crucified according to the
prophecy, rose from the dead according to the prophecy

and established a New Covenant Church according to the
prophecy. As St. John the Apostle tells us in his eye-wit-
ness report: “In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God; and the Word was God . . . And the
Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. And we saw
his glory—glory as of the only-begotten of the Father

—

full of grace and of truth.” (John



Jesus had to be God. Only God could have been so all

wise, so all holy, so all God-like. Only God could have, in

the brief span of three years, without schooling, without

political power, without military conquest, without writ-

ing a single line or setting foot on a single foreign land,

so profoundly affected the course of human conduct.

Only the actual coming of the Messiah could have so

suddenly quieted the great expectancy of His Coming.

Now what does all this have to do with the author’s as-

sertion that you need the origin of the Catholic Church?

The point, dear reader, is this: Jesus was, for a fact, God

Incarnate in the flesh; and Jesus did, for a fact, establish

a New Covenant Church; and the New Covenant Church

established by Jesus is, for a fact, none other than the

Catholic Church. The point is: you need the origin of the

Catholic Church because it is a divine origin, because it

certifies that the Catholic Church exists and functions not

by man's authority but by God s authority

.

No other

church on the face of the earth can offer you this certifi-

cation and the tremendous consolation that goes with it.

This is not idle sectarian presumption; history affirms

in the most unequivocal language that the Catholic

Church, or “Roman” Catholic Church if you prefer, is

the Church personally founded and constituted by our

Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. History is filled with ref-

erences to the “Catholic” Church that emerged out of

Jerusalem nineteen hundred years ago, established its

headquarters in Rome, then, despite many bloody perse-

cutions, persisted down through the centuries, never once

losing its identity as “the Catholic Church.” History is

filled with the most authoritative testimony proving that

the apostles and Church Fathers were members of this

same Catholic Church.

There is the Apostles’ Creed, for example, in which it

is written: “I believe in the holy Catholic Church . . .
”

There are the letters of Polycarp, disciple of the Apostle

John, signed: “Polycarp, Catholic Bishop of Smyrna.”

16 ]



There is a letter by Ignatius of Antioch, illustrious Church

Father of the second century, in which he states: “Where

the bishop is, there let the multitude of believers be; even

as where Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church.” And

there is the famous Nicene Creed, composed by the

Church Fathers of the fourth century, which contains

the declaration: “I believe in one, holy, catholic and

apostolic Church ...”

Acknowledging that Rome was the seat of highest

authority in the infant Christian Church the same Igna-

tius quoted above wrote in the introduction of his Igna-

tius to the Romans: “Ignatius, also called Theophorus, to

the Church that has found mercy in the transcendent

Majesty of the Most High Father and of Jesus Christ,

His only Son; the Church by the will of Him who willed

all things that exist, beloved and illuminated through the

faith and love of Jesus Christ our God; which also pre-

sides in the chief place of the Roman territory . . . pre-

siding in love, maintaining the law of Christ, and bearer

of the Father’s name; her do I therefore salute in the

name of Jesus Christ.” And Ignatius was not the only

Church Father who acknowledged that the infant Chris-

tian Church was synonymous with the “Roman” Catholic

Church; Hegessippus, Tertullian, Caius, Hippilytus, Cy-

prian, Anthanasius, Augustine and a host of others also

acknowledged it, as you will see in the following chapters

of this booklet. Cyprian put it most succinctly. He called

the Catholic Church headquartered in Rome the Church

“whence the unity of the Christian priesthood has its

source.”

History does indeed furnish proof, overwhelming proof,

of the divine origin of the Catholic Church; and in prov-

ing the divine origin of the Catholic Church history

proves the strictly human origin of the other Christian

churches. Observe, if you will, that in the historical ac-

counts of primitive Christianity there is not even the

slightest mention of a Coptic Church, a Greek or Russian

[
7

]



Orthodox Church, a Lutheran Church, an Anglican (Epis-

copal) Church, a Methodist Church, a Baptist Church, a

Presbyterian Church, et al. Observe, if you will, that ev-

ery single history of Christian development describes the

Coptic churches as having been formed in the fifth cen-

tury by one Dioscorus, the independent Greek and Rus-

sian Orthodox churches as having been formed in the

eleventh century by one Michael Cerularius, the Protest-

ant churches as having been formed in the sixteenth and

seventeenth centuries by Martin Luther, John Calvin,

King Henry the Eighth, John Wesley, etc., and the Chris-

tian cults—Mormon, Christian Scientist, Jehovah’s Wit-
ness, etc.—as having been formed in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries by Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy,

Charles Taze Russell, etc. Observe , if you willy that every

single one of these churches' founders were
mortal hu-

mans the same as you and 1.

Could it be that the above churches are newly formed

“branches” of the historic Catholic Church? No, that

could not possibly be. A branch of something, as you well

know, is always a member of that something, always al-

lied with that something, always controlled in large
meas-

ure by that something—illustration: the branch of a tree,
the branch of a river, the branch of a business

corpora-

tion, the branch of a state government. Hence hi order

for the above churches to qualify as branches of the

historic Catholic Church they would perforce have to be

in communion with it, which obviously they are noL

Could it be that they are of divine origin by virtue of

“divine inspiration”? No again. Nothing could be more

preposterous. Christ, you will recall, roundly condemned

the idea of denominationalism (Mark 3:25 , Luke 11-17)

and pledged that it would never be identified with
His

true fold (John 10:16). To suggest, therefore, that He

would inspire people to form new independent church

groups—to suggest that He would sponsor denomination-

[
8

]



alism in His fold—is to accuse Him of the most flagrant
inconsistency.

One last try: Could it be that they are of divine origin

by virtue of the divine origin of the gospel they preach?

That is to say, could they possibly belong to the spirit of

the original Christian Church? No, here again we are
faced with an appalling absurdity. Think! How can divine
origin be attributed to hundreds of different gospels, some

of them as different as night and day, when the whole
world knows that Christ promulgated only one Gospel?

By their own admission they preach different gospels, for
by their own admission it is their disagreement over what
constitutes Christ’s whole and true Gospel which keeps

them divided into separate denominations. If they were

really in the spirit of the original Christian Church there

would not be all these divergent precepts of faith, there

would not be this arbitrariness, this self-appointed free-

dom to formulate and preach contrary gospels. Such arbi-
trariness, said the Apostle Paul, is thoroughly opposed to

the spirit of the original Christian Church (Rom. 16:17,
Gal. 1:18, Eph. M-5).

No, one cannot, without wandering far afield of Sacred

Scripture, history and logic, ascribe divine origin to any

church but the Catholic Church. When all of the facts
are scrutinized carefully and objectively she alone emerges

as the Church personally founded, constituted and sanc-
tioned by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

[
9

]



YOU NEED THE

UNITY
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

A careful analysis of those passages of Sacred
Scripture

which relate to the formation of the
Christian Church

reveals that Christ was particularly emphatic
on one

point: His Church, put on earth to represent
the eternal

unitv of the Triune Godhead—Father, Son and Holy
Spirit—would also be characterized by a perfect and en-
during unity; would, in fact, be a part

of the heavenly

unity. Witness Christ’s poignant prayer
to God the

Father:

“AND THE GLORY THAT THOU HAS GIVEN

TO ME I HAVE GIVEN TO THEM, THAT

THEY MAY BE ONE, EVEN AS WE ARE ONE,

I IN THEM AND THOU IN ME; THAT THEY

MAY BE PERFECTED IN UNITY.” John 17:

23-23.

Nor was Christ any less explicit when
He declared:

“There shall be ONE fold and ONE Shepherd (John

10:16). Nor was the Apostle Paul any less
explicit when,

writing to his converts in the faith,
he said: You are

called in ONE body” (Col. 3:15). “ONE body ... ONE

spirit . . . ONE hope . . . ONE Lord . . . ONE faith . . .

ONE baptism” (Eph. 4:^-5).

Unity—perfect, constant unity—was indeed part of the
divine plan for the Church of Jesus Christ, and for

good

reason: “If a kingdom is divided against, itself, that king-

dom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself,

that house cannot stand,” said our Blessed Lord (Mark

3:21^-25). If His Church was to survive the centuries, and

[
10

]



He pledged that it would, it would have to remain indom-

itably, invincibly united.

All of which explains, dear reader, why you need the

unity of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is the

only church which has come down through the Christian

centuries indomitably, invincibly united—united in all de-
partments: in membership, in belief and in authority.

The Catholic Church is the only church which wears this

trademark of the true Church of Jesus Christ.

Wishful thinking? No, Catholic unity has long been

recognized, even by many of her severest critics, as one

of the most conspicuous facts, one of the great phenome-

nons, of history. To say that Catholic unity is phenome-

nal, however, is to put it lightly. It is nothing short of

miraculous, miraculous in a way which clearly evidences

the protecting Hand of God. The Caesars killed 30 popes,
hundreds of bishops and priests and countless lay mem-
bers of the Church in their determination to destroy

Catholic unity and eventually the Church itself—but the
affect of their persecution was to make the Church

stronger, more united than ever. The armies of Attila the

Hun ravaged the Church horribly as they swarmed over
Europe—until they were stopped cold on the steps of St.
Peter’s Basilica in Rome and turned back by one lone,
unarmed figure, the Pope. The Protestant Reformation

witnessed the martyrdom, especially in England, of tens

of thousands of bishops, priests and members of monastic

orders because they refused to break with the Pope and

embrace the new state religions. Today, four centuries

later, the Catholic Church is still in business in those

countries, still united under the Vicar of Christ in Rome.

Then it was Napoleon’s turn. He solemnly vowed that
he would “still the voice of the Pope forever.” But Na-

poleon was fated to ask for the Pope’s forgiveness and

the Last Sacraments of the Church before he died. And
in our own times we see Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse Tung

[
11

]



attempting the disruption of Catholic unity— with simi-
lar success.

A miracle of cohesion indeed! Never in all the annals
of the human race has a society been subjected to so
much stress and still remained intact.

Now what of the other Christian churches? Can you
ascribe real honest to goodness unity to Eastern Ortho-

doxy and Protestantism? Lo, what has become of the or-

iginal Eastern Orthodox and Protestant churches? Look

at their histories—in contrast to the nineteen hundred
year old steadfast oneness of the Catholic Church the

original Eastern Orthodox Church (Greek) has, in a rela-

tively short time, become split into 14 separate jurisdic-

tions. In the brief period of four hundred years the orig-

inal Protestant churches (Lutheran and Anglican) have

become divided and sub-divided into no less than 538

distinct and autonomous bodies.

And the divisions outside of the Catholic Church con-
tinue unabated. The records show that for every two

Protestant bodies that merge in an attempt toward uni-

ty four new ones spring up on the sidelines. The situation
has gotten so out of hand that many of the more con-
scientious Protestant leaders are admitting now that real
unity within their ranks is a lost cause. And they have
begun to cast wistful, envious eyes at the great, imperish-

able unity of the Mother Church of Christianity — for
never has it been more obvious than now that the perfect
and constant unity Christ promised his Church is to be

found only under her ancient and holy mantle.

[U]



YOU NEED THE

UNIVERSALITY
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

It is quite true that a considerable number of Christian

churches have world-wide membership and can, therefore,

boast of “universality.” The major Protestant denomina-

tions are definitely active throughout the world, the East-

ern Orthodox churches have adherents throughout the

world and in recent years a few of the Christian cults

have likewise spread throughout the world.

But be that as it may, dear reader, you still need the

universality of the Catholic Church-—because hers is a
very special brand of universality. Hers is the scriptural

brand of universality. Hers is that special brand of uni-

versality which Christ said would distinguish His true

Church on earth.

The uniquely scriptural character of Catholic univer-

sality is easily proved. In Sacred Scripture Christ said to

His infant Church: “This gospel shall be preached in the

whole world, for a witness to all nations . . . Go, there-

fore, into all nations, baptizing them. . . . Go into the

whole world and preach the gospel to every creature”

(Matt. 28:1b, 28:18, Mark 16:15). There was no provision

for vacillation or procrastination in Our Lord’s words; He

was making it very clear that His Church was to under-

take its evangelistic crusade in the world, that is acquire

its universality, immediately, without delay. And His

Church did not delay. Obedient to the divine directive

the apostles and their disciples set out immediately after

Christ’s Ascension to plant the faith throughout the

known world. “They went forth and preached every-

th



where, while the Lord worked withal and confirmed the

Word by the signs that followed” (Mark 16:20).

Thus we see in Sacred Scripture that Christ’s true

Church was not only ordained to be a universal church

but it acquired this characteristic at the very outset of

Christianity—just as the Catholic Church acquired her
universality at the very outset of Christianity . Thus we

see in Sacred Scripture that Christ’s true Church was

not only commissioned to preach the gospel to every na-

tion, but to baptize, that is Christianize , every nation

—

just as the Catholic Church has Christianized every na-

tion that has ever been Christianized by missionary ef-

fort*

That the Catholic Church accomplished these things

is clearly borne out in every scholarly account of Chris-

tian development. Select from any first rate public library

a complete and impartial history of Christian develop-

ment and you will see that while the Coptic Church lay

static in Egypt the Catholic Church, under the Bishop

of Rome, the Pope, followed up the missionary advances

of the Apostles by converting single handed the masses of

all Eastern and Western Europe—accounting for the fact
that Europe is still predominantly Catholic. Then in the

middle ages while the schismatic Greek and Russian Or-

thodox churches were languishing in their precious na-

tionalism the Catholic Church extended the faith of

Christ to Asia and the hinterlands of Africa—accounting
for the fact that today the majority of Christians on

those continents are Catholic. Finally it will be observed

that in the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,

while the newborn Protestant churches were busy setting

themselves up as the state religion and commandeering

Catholic properties in their respective countries, the

Catholic Church, undaunted by these losses, crossed the

oceans and planted Christianity on the North and South

*Some nations were Christianized by immigration—the U.S.A.,
for example.

[
14

]



American continents—accounting for the fact that today
three-fifths of all Christians in North America and nine-

teen-twentieths of all Christians in South America are

Catholic.

Yes, history proves conclusively that unlike the recent-

ly acquired “universality” of the other Christian bodies

the universality of the Catholic Church spans the cen-

turies, keeping pace with the advance of civilization and

oftentimes spearheading the advance—precisely as Christ
ordered.

But there is still another special quality about Catho-

lic universality which should appeal to the earnest Chris-

tian, a quality which adds still more weight to the

Church’s claim that hers is the only real Christian uni-

versality: It is uniform, evenly diffused throughout the

world, so that it can rightly be said that the Catholic

faith is not peculiar to any one race or clime but common

to all races and all climes. Whereas Eastern Orthodoxy

is concentrated for the most part in Russia and the Bal-

kan countries, and whereas Protestantism is concentrated

for the most part in the U.S.A. and Western Europe, the

Catholic Church has proportionately large representation

on every continent—hers is a world-wide concentration.
Consult a reliable world religious census and see if this

is not the case.

Proof that the Catholic Church is not peculiar to any

one race or clime—proof that she is not a “Roman”
Catholic Church—is seen not only in the geographical
location and racial admixture of her membership but in

the nationalities of her ruling hierarchy. Among the popes

there have been Englishmen, Frenchmen, Germans, Span-

iards, Greeks and Italians. Yes and there have been Jew-

ish and Negro popes. Pope Victor, Pope Melchiades and

Pope Gelasius were all Negroes. In the Church today

there are a large number of Jewish, Negro, Indian and

Oriental bishops and cardinals in addition to those of

European nationality, so it is quite possible that there

[
15

]



will be another non-European pope before long. Talk

about your United Nations—the Catholic Church has
existed as a United Nations for two-thousand years.

Now let the author point out one more feature of the
Church’s universality, one that certainly should provoke

some serious thinking in the minds of all: her name.

Catholic means universal. Catholic is the name given to

the true Christian Church by the apostles (Ref. Apostles’

Creed)
,
and Catholic is the name which has distinguished

this Church from all others since the beginning of Chris-

tianity. Hence the great St. Augustine was inspired to

write: “The very name Catholic, which not without cause

among so many heretics that church alone has obtained;

so that, although all heretics wish to be called Catholic,

no heretic, if a stranger asks the way to the Catholic

Church, dares to point out his own basilica or house”

(Ep. Fundam. Chapter 4).

Yes, as St. Augustine pointed out, other churches do

indeed wish to be called catholic, wish to be called uni-

versal, but when asked to identify the true Catholic

Church, so named and so characterized by the Apostles

and primitive Church Fathers, one church immediately

comes to mind: not their own but the church head-

quartered in Rome and ruled from the Seat of Peter. As
much as they resist the idea their basic intelligence

tells them that they have no more legitimate claim to the

name Catholic and the heritage that goes with it than a

new automobile manufacturing firm has to the names

Ford, Chrysler and General Motors and the heritage of

achievement that goes with those names.

[
16

]



YOU NEED THE

AUTHORITY
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

It goes without saying that God’s Church on earth is

deprived of His visible Presence, that is the sight of Him

as He is. And it goes without saying that His Church on

earth is also deprived of His audible Voice, that is the

sound of His Voice from His own Mouth. Such intimate

contact with God is quite obviously reserved only

for the proven worthy: the blessed in heaven. Only on

one brief occasion did God appear recognizable on earth,

the occasion, as the Apostle Paul described it, when He

appeared “in the brightness of His glory and the image

of His Substance” to effect the redemption of mankind
—

when He appeared in the Person of Jesus Christ. And

only on a rare few occasions has He spoken directly to

earthly man.

It also goes without saying that despite the absence of

God’s visible Presence and audible Voice He rules supreme

over His Church.

And how is God able to rule His Church on earth

—

how is He able, generation after generation, to manifest

His divine Will to the faithful who are guided in the main

by what they see and hear—without being seen or heard?
Anyone familiar with Sacred Scripture knows the answer

to that. In Sacred Scripture it is ever so clear that God

rules His Church, manifests His Divine Will, through per-

sonal representatives , through men of proven loyalty duly

appointed by Him , duly indoctrinated in those precepts

of faith which constitute His divine Will and duly author-

ized to teach in His Name.

Thus when God established the Church of the Old

[
17

]



Covenant He chose Moses to be His personal representa-
tive, His spokesman

,
to the people. This was one of those

rare occasions when God did actually speak out from
heaven. And He decreed that this high office would be
perpetuated in Aaron, and after Aaron in Aaron s “seed”
(Exodus 29:9). And lest anyone get the notion that Moses
and his successors in the Old Covenant Church lacked
authority to pronounce what was binding on the con-
science of man, God said:

“THEY SHALL SHOW THE TRUE JUDG-
MENT. AND THOU SHALL DO WHATEVER
THEY SAY THAT PRESIDE IN THE PLACE
WHICH THE LORD SHALL CHOOSE, AND
WHAT THEY SHALL TEACH THEE . . . AND
THOU SHALT FOLLOW THEIR SENTENCE
... HE THAT WILL BE PROUD, AND REFUSE
TO OBEY THEIR COMMANDMENT . . . THAT
MAN SHALL DIE.” Deut. 17:9-12.
And so it was when God, in the Person of Jesus Christ,

established the Church of the New Covenant, the Chris-
tian Church. Anticipating His Sacrifice on the Cross and

His subsequent Ascension into heaven, after which He
no longer would be the visible, audible Shepherd of His

flock, He appointed one of His apostles to that office.
Simon Bar-Jona was the apostle’s name, but inasmuch as

Simon was destined to be the first human head of His
Church, its corner-stone so to speak, Christ changed his

name to Cephas, which in Aramaic, the language Christ
spoke, means rock

,
and which in Greek, the language of

the original New Testament Scriptures, is interpreted
Peter. Addressing this humble fishennan Christ said:

“Thou art Simon, the son of John; thou shalt be called
Cephas” (John 1:1^2).

Despite the arguments of some sectarians that Cephas

does not mean rock (singular) in the Aramaic language
spoken by Christ we know for a fact that it does. For

[
18

]



one thing traditional Christianity has always held to

this translation and for another thing the inhabitants

of three small Syrian villages— Maalula, Bachaa and
Giubbaadin— where the ancient Aramaic tongue is still
spoken have verified it. The great burden of proof is all

on the side of the Catholic interpretation.

Nor did Christ equivocate one little bit when He ap-

pointed Peter His Vicar on earth. In the presence of all

His apostles and in His most peremptory tone of voice

He said to Peter: “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona . . .

thou are Cephas (or Peter) , and upon this rock I will

build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail

against it. And I will give thee the keys of the kingdom

of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall

be bound in heaven; and whatever thou shalt loose on

earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Math. 16:17-19). “Feed

my lambs . . . feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).

That Christ gave the Apostle Peter pre-eminent au-

thority over His infant Church can be further ascertained

from two other factors: never once did Christ mention

His Church until this occasion when He connected it

with the name of Peter (selecting a leader is always the

first step in forming an organized society) and after

Christ was gone from their midst the other apostles ac-

cepted Peter's leadership without question giving him the

presiding place every time they assembled in council.

In the course of time Peter’s apostleship took him to

Rome—he wrote his epistles from Rome, or “Babylon” as
Rome was frequently called in those days (1 Peter, 5:13)

—where he became the first Bishop of Rome and where he
eventually suffered martyrdom. This is affirmed by the

most reputable Protestant as well as Catholic historians.

Wrote the eminent Protestant historian Cave in his

Historia Literaria: “That Peter was at Rome, and held

the See there for some time, we fearlessly affirm with the

whole multitude of the ancients.” And Peter’s successor

as Bishop of Rome was St. Linus (67-76) , and after St.

[19]



Linus it was St. Cletus (76-88)
,
and after St. Cletus it

was St. Clement I (88-97) and after St. Clement I it was

St. Evaristus (97-105)—and so forth right on through
the centuries in a continuous

,
uninterrupted succession

to Pius XII of the present day. This, too, is borne out

in every reputable, scholarly history.

All of which boils down to one highly significant fact:
the God-given authority to preside over the Christian

Church which the Apostle Peter possessed and which his

successors inherited has reposed in only one Christian

church since Christianity began

—

the church called

Catholic. Never in all the history of Christianity has any

other church even as much as pretended that it owned
the Seat of Peter. Never has the head of any other

church dared to step forth and proclaim to the world:

not the Pope of the Catholic Church , am Peter s
successor

,
Christ’s Vicar on earth!”

And that, dear reader, is why you need the authority
of the Catholic Church— because it is God-given au-
thority, because when you pattern your faith on the

directives of the Catholic Church you know you are

abiding in the Will of God.

[
20

]



YOU NEED THE

BIBLE RELATIONSHIP
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

As a professed Christian you very probably have read

the Bible a great deal. As a professed Christian you

very probably regard the Bible as one of your greatest

sources, perhaps your greatest source, of spiritual com-

fort and inspiration. As one of the more ardent pro-

fessed Christians you very probably consider yourself

somewhat of an authority on the Bible, being able to

quote hundreds of its passages accurately from memory.

But really how familiar are you with the origin of the

Bible? Not the origin of the individual books of the

Bible, for their authors are self-evident, but the combined

work, the finished edition as Christians know it today.

Who introduced the Jewish Old Testament into the
Christian Bible? Who selected the 27 books of the New’
Testament? Who numbered their chapters and verses?
Who first undertook to reproduce the Bible? In other
words, to whom are you indebted for that Bible w’hich

is so dear to you? Upon whose authority do you accept

the Bible
,
particularly the New Testament , as the holy

Word of God?

These are important questions because unless you

know the answers a full understanding and appreciation

of the Bible is quite impossible. Unless you know the

answers you can hardly call yourself an “authority” on

the Bible.

“But of course, the Holy Bible wras compiled by the

primitive Christian Church,” you may reply. “It is com-

mon knowledge that it was the Church Fathers wTho

decided on the retention of the Jewish Old Testament

[
21

]



in the Christian Book of Scripture, who collected the

writings of the apostles and their disciples—approx-
imately 300 writings in all—and after careful examina-
tion concluded that 27 of them were divinely inspired

and therefore entitled to Scriptural status ... it is

common knowledge that in the year 417 the Old Testa-

ment books and the 27 New Testament books were

submitted to Innocent I, who was highest in authority

at the time, for his ratification and that the scholarly

Jerome translated the approved books into the universal

Latin vernacular and joined them into a single volume

for the first time.”

Yes, dear reader, all that is common knowledge. But

permit the author to point out that while your informa-

tion is correct information is not sufficient information

to give you the whole and true picture. For the whole

and true picture you need to learn more detail— you
need to obtain a complete, fully documented history of

the Bible and study all of the facts. Do this and you

will be amazed at how the complexion of the picture will

change.

Study all of the facts and you will discover, for

example, that the Church Fathers who selected the

books of the Bible were all professed Catholics, that

Innocent I was none other than Pope Innocent I, that

Jerome was none other than Saint Jerome, a holy

Catholic monk, that Saint Jerome was commissioned to

produce his famous original copy of the Bible, called the

Latin Vulgate , by none other than Pope Damasus, under

whom he once served as secretary, and that the scribes

who undertook to reproduce Saint Jerome’s original

Bible were Catholic scribes, members of Catholic mon-

astic orders every one of them.

You will discover, in short, that it was the Catholic

Church, under the Bishop of Rome, the Pope, who gave

the holy Bible to Christianity and none other. It could

not have been otherwise because the Catholic Church

[
22

]



was the only organized Christian church then in ex-

istence. There were a few Arians and Apollinarians about

at the time, true, but they were too scattered, too busy

fighting charges of heresy, too concerned with their

own survival to assist in the compilation of the Bible.

Proof of this is seen in the fact that Arianism and Apol-

linarianism disappeared shortly thereafter.

Today’s Christians do not generally realize it but the

books of the Bible were without chapters and numbered

verses until early in the thirteenth century. For this

Christians can thank one Stephen Langton, a Catholic

priest who later became the Cardinal Archbishop of Cant-

erbury. He introduced chapters and verses into the so-
called Parisian Bible about the year 1226 and after that

they were employed in all Bibles, including the printed

Hebrew Bible. Our modern chapter and verse divisions do

not differ appreciably from those of Stephen Langton.

No competent Biblical scholar has ever denied that
the Catholic Church is the mother of the Bible. Not

even Martin Luther could bring himself to deny it.

Wrote the founding father of Protestantism and the

man generally recognized as the foremost Protestant

Biblical authority: “We are compelled to concede to the
Papists, that they have the Word of God, that we

received it from them, and that without them we should

have no knowledge of it at all” (Commentary on St. John
,

Chapter 14)

.

“But what about the reports describing the Catholic

Church’s suppression of the Bible?” you may ask. Those
reports, dear friend in Christ, are a lot of bunk — pure,
unadulterated bunk! Knowing how much the average

person reveres the Bible the enemies of the Church

deliberately circulate such reports to induce anti-Catholic

sentiment. Honestly, would the Catholic Church spend

three centuries collecting the books of the Bible, spend

many more centuries laboriously copying it by hand

and shed rivers of blood protecting those first few Bibles

[23]



from marauding heathen tribesmen if she did not value

the Bible most highly? Honestly, would the Catholic

Church base the liturgy of her divine worship on the

Gospels and Epistles of the Bible, direct that her priests

must kiss the Gospels and Epistles at Low Mass, incense

them at High Mass and read them aloud to the congre-

gation at all Masses if she did not recognize the

sacredness of the Bible? Honestly, would the Catholic

Church admonish her faithful to procure a Bible and

reward them with a rich grant of indulgences each day

they spend at least 15 minutes reading the Bible if she

did not want them to know and love the Bible? Hardly!

And if you investigated the Catholic Church you would

find that she honors the Bible in many other ways. In

fact if you investigated the Catholic Church you would

be forced to conclude that she gives the Bible its highest

place of honor.

History tells us that after the Catholic Church

compiled the Bible back in Christian antiquity it re-

mained her exclusive property for over a hundred years,

until the formation of the Coptic Church late in the

fifth century. Now if the Catholic Church has shown
little respect for the Bible as her antagonists allege how,

pray tell, can present day Christians be sure that she

did not make a great lot of mischievous changes and

omissions in the context of the Bible when she had it

all to herself? How can Christianity be sure that the
entire New Testament is not a big Catholic forgery?

The plain truth is: no one, absolutely no one, can be

certain of the authenticity and divine inspiration of the

Christian Bible without complete faith in the authority

and integrity of the Catholic Church. Unless there is

complete faith that the Catholic Church selected the

genuine, divinely inspired writings of the apostles and

their disciples and then reverently preserved them in all

their original purity there can be no certainty at all in

the convictions of those who regard the Bible as the holy

[24]



Word of God. Try as one might there is just no escaping
these conclusions.

The obvious fact that the authority of the Bible rests
on the authority of the Catholic Church is a source of
great comfort to Catholics. It establishes the authority

of the Catholic Church as the pre-eminent Christian
authority. It explains why Catholics trust so implicitly
in the Church’s interpretation of the Bible, for obviously

if she can give Christianity the true Scriptures she can

also give Christianity the true meaning of the Scrip-
tures. And it explains, dear reader, why the author is
compelled to say that you too need the Bible relation-

ship of the Catholic Church: as a Catholic Christian

you would be a Bible Christian in the truest, fullest sense
of the word.

[
25

]



YOU NEED THE

TRADITIONS
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Is the Bible a complete resume of the deeds and

teachings of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? No,

dear reader, the Bible itself confesses that it is not—
and it tells why:

“ This is the disciple who bears witness concerning

these things
,
and who has written these things, and

we know that his witness is true. There are, however,

many other things that Jesus did; but if every one

of these should be written, not even the world itself,

1 think, could hold the books that would have to be

written” (John 21:21^-25).

Is the Bible a complete resume of those teachings of

Christ that are essential to the Christian deposit of faith?

No, again the Bible confesses that it is not and tells

where the other essential precepts of Christian faith are

to be found:

“Stand firm, and hold the traditions you have

learned, whether by word or letter of ours” (2 Thess.

2:51 ). “And we charge you, brethren, in the name

of Our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every

brother who lives irregularly, and not according to

the traditions received from us” (Thess. 3:6).

In other words, the apostles committed some of

Christ’s teachings to writing and others they passed on

by word of mouth, that is they committed them to

“tradition.”

Did the primitive Church Fathers accept the unwritten

[ 26 ]



teachings of the apostles, the “traditions” that were

handed down by word of mouth, as essential components

of the Christian deposit of faith? Indeed they did:

ORIGEN: “Let the ecclesiastical teaching handed
down by order of succession from the Apostles, and

abiding till now in the Church, be observed; that

only is to be believed the truth which no way differs

from ecclesiastical and Apostolic tradition” (De

Princip., ii?PG,xi. 116).

GREGORY NYSSEN: “It is enough for the demon-
stration of our position to have the tradition which

comes to us from the Fathers transmitted as an

inheritance by succession from the Apostles through

the saints that followed them” (Contr. Eunom.

iv. PG,xlv. 653)

.

BASIL: “Of the doctrines and decrees we have some

from written teaching; others we have received

apportioned to us from the tradition of the Apostles

in a mysterious manner, both of which [i.e. Scripture

and tradition] have the same force” (De Spir. S.

663, PG,xxxii. 188)

.

CHRYSOSTOM: “It is evident that the Apostles
did not communicate all in writing; they com-

municated . . . much without writing. Both deserve
equal faith ... It is tradition; ask no more” (Horn,

iv. in II Thess).

EPIPHANIUS: “We must also use tradition, since
all cannot be got from the divine Scripture, where-

fore the divine Apostles handed down some things

in writings, others in tradition” (Haer. lxi. 6,PG,

xli. 1048)

.

If space permitted we could call in the testimony of
scores of other leaders of the primitive Christian Church

[27]



affirming that traditional teachings are just as essential

to the Christian deposit of faith as scriptural teachings.

Now for the sixty-four dollar question: Did the
Church Fathers affirm that the traditions handed down

by the apostles and the traditions of the Catholic Church

are in fact the same traditions? Well, let us see:

ANTHANASIUS: “But it will hardly be out of place
to investigate likewise the ancient traditions, and

the doctrines and faith of the Catholic Church,

which the Lord communicated, the Apostles pro-

claimed, and the Fathers preserved; for on this has

the Church been founded” (First Letter to Serapion,.

n. 28)

.

IRENAEUS: “The Catholic Church, having re-
ceived the Apostolic teaching and faith, though

spread over the whole world, guards it sedulously, as

though dwelling in one house; and these truths she

uniformly teaches, as having but one soul and one

heart; these truths she proclaims and hands down

as though she had but one mouth” (Adv. Haer.,

1, x2;IV).

LACTANTIUS: “The Catholic Church, therefore,
is the only one that retains the true worship. This

is the source of truth; this the dwelling place of

faith; this the temple of God” (Divine Institutions
,

Book 4, Chap. 30)

.

AUGUSTINE: “These traditions of the Christian
name, therefore, so numerous, so powerful, and most

dear, justly keep a believing man in the Catholic
Church.”

Yes, dear reader, the traditions of the Catholic Church

are indeed part and parcel of the true Christian deposit

of faith. Some of them are not to be found in the Bible,

and some of them are only vaguely inferred in the Bible,

[
28

]



but, nevertheless, they were taught by Christ Our Lord

and handed down by His holy apostles — they were
\
prescribed by God to help you secure the eternal salva-
tion of your soul.

What are the apostolic traditions? There are quite a
number of them, too many to describe in detail within
the limited space of this pamphlet. But the author will

cite a few. Veneration of the saints in heaven is one,

the doctrine of Purgatory is one, the Church’s teaching

on Indulgences is one and the use of sacramentals such

as holy water, blessed palm, etc. is another. Some are

very important to a devout expression of faith and some

are not so important but collectively they are essential to

a full expression of faith; which is why Catholics cherish
them all, for a full expression of faith is the kind of faith

Christ asks of all his loyal followers.

[
29

]



YOU NEED THE

WORSHIP
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Catholics worship God in many ways: by assisting at

Mass, by praying the Rosary, by making the Stations

of the Cross, by singing His praises in innumerable

hymns, litanies and psalms and by frequent private medi-

tations. All are pleasing to God and all are spiritually

rewarding. But the profoundest expression of Catholic

worship, the expression of worship most pleasing to God

and for sake of which He pours out His most abundant
graces

,
is the Mass. In fact the Mass is so spiritually

rewarding it is the center and heart, the focal point , of

all Catholic wojsfiip.

It is primarily the Mass the author has reference to,

dear reader, when he says you need the worship of the

Catholic Church.

You see, the Mass is not what some of the Church’s

antagonists make it out to be. It is not “something the

Pope dreamed up back in the middle ages to give the

Catholic Church a distinctive form of worship service.”

It is not “a pagan ritual borrowed from the ancient

Romans and embellished with overtones of Christian

prayer and symbolism.” In fact the hierarchy of the

Catholic Church had nothing whatever to do with the

origin of the Mass.

A little honest investigation will bear out that the

Mass of the Catholic Church originated not with mortal

man but with Jesus Christ — God himself. It was Christ
who instituted the Mass , He who prescribed it as the
central act of Christian worship , and no one else.

[
30

]



It all happened at the Last Supper. At the Last Supper

Christ inaugurated the Sacrifice of the New Law, perfect-
ing with the offering of His own flesh and blood the ani-
mal sacrifices of the Old Law. At this propitious moment,

with His holy apostles gathered about Him, the Son of

God took bread and wine, transformed those common
substances into His own flesh and blood, offered them up
to the heavenly Father for the remission of sin, gave them

to His apostles to eat and drink, then directed that they

should perpetuate this divine rite for the spiritual benefit

of future generations of the faithful:

“AND WHILE THEY WERE AT SUPPER,
JESUS TOOK BREAD, AND BLESSED AND
BROKE, AND GAVE IT TO HIS DISCIPLES,
AND SAID, ‘TAKE AND EAT; THIS IS MY
BODY/ AND TAKING A CUP, HE GAVE
THANKS AND GAVE IT TO THEM SAYING,
ALL OF YOU DRINK OF THIS; FOR THIS IS
MY BLOOD OF THE NEW COVENANT,
WHICH IS BEING SHED FOR MANY UNTO
THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS ... DO THIS
IN COMMEMORATION OF ME.” Matt. 26:26-28,
Mark 14:22-24, Luke 22:19-20.

Now observe the liturgy of the Mass. Note that what
took place at the Last Supper is precisely what takes

place at the Mass: the four principal parts of the Last

Supper— the Preparation, the Offering, the Consecration
and the Holy Communion—are the four principal parts
of the Mass, the actions of Christ at the Last Supper

are the actions of the priest at Mass, the words pro-

nounced by Christ at the Last Supper are the words pro-

nounced by the priest at Mass, the miracle performed by

Christ at the Last Supper is the miracle performed by

the priest at Mass.

Yes, dear reader, if you will but observe the Mass
carefully you will recognize that it is no ordinary church

[31]



service but is the great epoch of the Last Supper re-

peated, just as Christ directed that it should be re-

peated— it is Christ keeping His promise, through His
Mystical Body the Church, to remain in the midst of

His followers “all days, even unto the consummation of

the world.”

But it is not really the priest who performs the

miracle of bringing the true and living Christ to the

altar; it is Christ who performs the miracle through the

priest. It is Christ, the eternal High Priest, who really

does the officiating at Mass. The congregation is oblivious

of the priests presence at the altar, being conscious

only of the Divine High Priest’s Presence.

Hence the Mass is in fact a living renewal not only of

Christ’s great love offering at the Last Supper but, since

the Last Supper prefigured Calvary, it is also a living

renewal, in an unbloody manner, of His great love offer-

ing on Calvary when He effected the Salvation of the

human race. The divine grace that flowed out on the

world from Christ on the Cross continues to flow out on

the world from Christ in the Mass.

No wonder the Mass is the center and heart of all

Catholic worship. No wonder Catholics flock to Mass in

great droves, even before sun-up while the rest of

Christendom sleeps. For to pay worshipful homage di-

rectly to God and to partake of His real life-giving

Substance is a privilege and a joy which surpasses all

expression.

The idea of Christ becoming actually physically

present on the altar in such a way that the faithful can

actually take Him Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, in-

to themselves does indeed strike some people as an absurd

impossibility. But that is because they fail to take sev-

eral prime factors into account: Christ’s promise to per-

form the miracle (John 6:52-55), Christ’s ability as

God to perform the miracle either directly or through

a human agency, and the testimony of the apostles and

[32]



Church Fathers confirming that such a miracle not only
took place but continues to take place on the altars of

the Catholic Church. Here is the testimony of Paul:

“The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not the shar-
ing of the blood of Christ? And the bread that we
break

,
is it not the partaking of the body of the

Lord?” (1 Cor. 10:16). “For he who eats (the bread)
and drinks (the wine) unworthily

, without distin-

guishing the body of the Lord , eats and drinks judg-

ment to himself” (1 Cor. 11:29).

And hear the testimony of the Church Fathers who
called the Real Presence of Christ on the altar “the Holy
Eucharist,” a name which it still bears in the Catholic
Church:

JUSTIN MARTYR: “This food is known among us
as the Eucharist ... We do not receive these things
as common bread and common drink; but as Jesus
Christ our Saviour, being made flesh by the Word of
God” (Apol. i,66,PG,vi,428).

CYRIL OF JERUSALEM: “Since then He has de-
clared and said of the bread, ‘This is my body,’ who
after that will venture to doubt? And seeing that
He has affirmed and said, ‘This is my blood,’ who
will raise a question and say it is not His blood?”

(Cat. Mystag, 4,PG,1097).

The author could fill volumes with statements such as
these by the primitive Church Fathers, but the above

should suffice to establish the Mass as the central act of
divine worship in the primitive Christian Church the

same as it is in the Catholic Church today. The above

should offer convincing proof that Christ prescribed the

Mass and lives in the Mass for the sanctification and
salvation of all who join with Him there.

[33]



YOU NEED THE

SACRAMENTS
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

The Catholic Church teaches that Christ our Lord

instituted seven holy rites, called sacraments, for His

Church to administer to the faithful; further that these

sacraments act as channels through which God dis-

penses special graces to the faithful; further that these

special graces are not only helpful to salvation but in

some instances vital to salvation; further that her seven

sacraments and the seven sacraments instituted by Christ

are the selfsame seven.

Protestantism disagrees arguing that Christ instituted

not seven but only two sacraments, that His sacraments

are not productive of grace but rather symbolize the

grace that is already produced through faith, that con-

sequently their reception by the faithful is not a pre-

requisite to salvation, faith in Jesus as personal Saviour

alone being sufficient unto salvation. In short, Protes-

tantism maintains that the sacraments of the Catholic

Church and the importance she attaches to them is all

wrong.

The question, therefore, that we should like to take

up here is: Are the sacraments of the Catholic Church

in truth the full complement of sacraments instituted by

Jesus Christ? Are they really needed by the Christian

faithful to secure their eternal salvation? Or is the

Catholic position regarding Christ’s sacraments all wrong

as Protestantism maintains? It is an important question,

one which every earnest Christian will want to have

resolved, because if there is anything the earnest

Christian must needs know it is the right way, the

[
34

]



divinely prescribed way, to eternal salvation. If it can

be proved that the Catholic sacraments are an integral

part of the divine plan of salvation then it behooves the

earnest Christian to partake of them, even though it

may involve the setting aside of some bitter prejudices.
If, on the other hand, it cannot be proved then one is

definitely just as well off without them—then it can be
presumed that Protestantism is right in saying that the

Catholic Church is wrong.

Now the purpose of this chapter, dear seeker after
Christian truth, is to furnish proof, conclusive proof,

that the Catholic Church is not wrong. Here it will be

shown that, according to the Word of Jesus Christ and

the example of His holy apostles, according to the

mainstream of Christian belief and practice down

through all the Christian centuries, the sacraments of

the Catholic Church are indeed the true Christian sacra-

ments and their reception by the faithful is indeed of

paramount importance to salvation. Here it will be

shown that you do indeed need the sacraments of the

Catholic Church to enjoy the fullness of the faith of

Jesus Christ.

Strong words, those, but let us review the seven sacra-

ments of the Catholic Church, diligently comparing them

first with the witness of Sacred Scripture and then with

the witness of Christian tradition, and see if they are

not justified. In other words, let us see some of this

alleged proof.

First let us consider the Catholic Sacrament of

Baptism. The Catholic Church holds that this sacrament

was instituted by Christ to introduce the Holy Spirit of

God into the soul, that is to initiate the soul into a new

life of supernatural grace, thereby making the recipient

a true child of God and heir to His everlasting kingdom.

Sacred Scripture: “Amen, amen
,
l say to you

, unless a

man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he
cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). And

[35]



the Catholic Church holds that this sacrament was or-

dered for infants as well as for adults. Sacred Scripture:

“Repent and be baptized EVERY ONE OF YOU in the
name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and

you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For to you

is the promise AND TO YOUR CHILDREN” (Acts
2:38-39).

\

Next take the Catholic Sacrament of Penance (the con-

fessing of one’s sins to a priest). The Catholic Church

holds that Christ instituted this sacrament when He
empowered the apostles, the first priests of His Church,

to forgive sins. Christ to His apostles: “Receive ye the

Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall forgive , they are for-

given them; and whose sins you shall retain, they shall

be retained” (John 20:22-23). The Catholic Church holds

that this grant of power once given to the Church would

always remain with the Church. Christ to His apostles:

“Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not
pass away” (Mark 13:31). “Go, therefore, and make

disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all

that I have commanded you; and behold, I am with
you all days, even unto the consummation of the world”

(Matt. 28:19-20).

Next take the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Communion

(the partaking of the actual Flesh and Blood, Soul and

Divinity, of Jesus Christ under the appearance, or sacra-

mental veil, of bread and wine). The Catholic Church

holds that this most sublime sacrament, designed to keep

the faithful nourished in divine grace, was promised to

the Church by Christ at Capharnaum and given to the

Church by Christ at the Last Supper. At Capharnaum:

“The bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the
world ... He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood
has life everlasting and I will raise him up on the last

day” (John 6:52-55). At the Last Supper: “And having

taken bread, he gave thanks and broke, and gave it to

[
36

]



them
,
saying

,
is my body, which is being given for

you; do this in commemoration of me! In like manner

he took also the wine, saying, ‘This is my blood” (Matt.
26:26-28, Mark 14:22-24, Luke 22:19-20). Verdict of the

apostles: “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not

the sharing of the blood of Christ? And the bread that

we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord?

(I Cor. 10:16). Also see I Cor. 11:28-29.

Next take the Catholic Sacrament of Confirmation

(when the Bishop lays his hand on the heads of the

newly baptized and bestows his blessing) . The Catholic

Church holds that Christ instituted this sacrament to

instill in the soul those special graces of the Holy

Spirit which increase Christian resolve and zeal. Sacred

Scripture: “And when Paul laid his hands on them, the

Holy Spirit came upon them” (Acts 19:6). “Do not

neglect the grace that is in thee, granted to thee by rea-

son of prophecy with the laying on of hands of the

presbyterate” (1 Tim. 4:14). “For this reason I admonish

we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the

Lord? (I Cor. 10:16). Also see I Cor. 11:28-29.

Next take the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Orders

(Ordination to the priesthood). The Catholic Church

holds that Christ instituted this sacrament to give the

priests of His Church the necessary power to offer the

Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the necessary grace to

shoulder all the other burdens of their ministerial office.

After instituting the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass Christ

said to His first priests: “Do this in commemoration

of me” (Luke 22:19). The Apostle Paul affirmed that

ordination to the priesthood confers special powers and

special graces from on High. To those he had ordained

Paul said: “Take heed to yourselves and to the whole

flock in which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops,

to rule the Church of God” (Acts 20:28). Also see
2 Cor. 8:18-19.



Next take the Catholic Sacrament of Matrimony. The

Catholic Church holds that Christ instituted this sacra-

ment to make the marriage bond a holy and indissoluble

bond, even as the bond between Him and His Church

is holy and indissoluble. Christ to those who questioned

the sacramental nature of matrimony: “For this cause

a man shall leave his father and mother , and cleave to

his wife , and the two shall become one flesh . . . What

therefore God has joined together let no man put

asunder” (Matt. 19:5-6). The Apostle Paul likens the

union of man and wife to the union of Christ and His

Church: “But just as the Church is subject to Christy

so also let wives be to their husbands in all things.

Husbands , love your wives , just as Christ also loved the

Churchy and delivered himself up for her” (Eph. 5:21^-25).

Lastly take the Catholic Sacrament of Extreme Unc-

tion (the anointing of the sick and dying). The

Catholic Church holds that Christ instituted this sacra-

ment to permit a final preparation for God's judgment.

Sacred Scripture: “And going forth , they preached that

men should repent , and they cast out many devils , and

anointed with oil many sick people y and healed them”

(Mark 6:12-13). “Is anyone among you sick? Let him

bring in the presbyters of the Churchy and let them

pray over him , anointing him with oil in the name of the

Lord . . . and if he be in sins , they shall be forgiven him”

(James 5:H-15).

There you have it, good friend, the Word of Christ

and the example of the apostles attesting both to the

validity and the efficacy of the seven sacraments of the

Catholic Church. In all seven of the Catholic sacraments.

Sacred Scripture affirms, the essential characteristics of a

valid Christian sacrament are conspicuously present: all

seven involve an outward sign or ceremony, all seven

were prescribed by Christ either directly or through His

apostles and all seven confer a special grace from God.

[
38

]



Now what of the verdict of Christian tradition? Does
the mainstream of Christian belief and practice down

through the nineteen hundred years of Christian his-

tory concur? Yes it does — unequivocably. It is to be
noted in Christian history that every single ancient and

semi-ancient Christian body — Catholic, Coptic, Greek
Orthodox and Russian Orthodox — hold to these same
seven sacraments and have always held to them. It is to

be noted that for the first fifteen hundred years all of

Christianity concurred, that for the last four hundred

years over four-fifths of Christianity has concurred. Of all

the Christian churches that have appeared on earth

since the time of Christ , and there have been thousands,

Protestantism alone has differed.

By every test then we know that the Catholic Church

is right. By every test we know that the sacraments of

the Catholic Church are Christ’s true sacraments, needed

by you and by me, by all who seek eternal salvation in

Jesus Christ our Lord.

[
39

]



YOU NEED THE

MARIOLOGY
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Do you agree that any sentiment which conforms with

the Divine Sentiment is in good taste? Do you agree

with the Apostle Paul that Christians should be “imita-

tors of God, as very dear children” (Eph. 5:1)? If you

do then you will also agree that the high honor accorded

the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Catholic Church is a

justified high honor. Because it is a scripturally attested

fact that God conferred on Mary not merely a high honor

but His very highest honor: He selected her from all the

women of the world to be the Mother of Jesus, to be the

Wellspring from which Redemption would come to the

human race:

“NOW IN THE SIXTH MONTH THE ANGEL
GABRIEL WAS SENT FROM GOD TO A TOWN
OF GALILEE CALLED NAZARETH, TO A
VIRGIN BETHROTHED TO A MAN NAMED
JOSEPH, OF THE HOUSE OF DAVID, AND
THE VIRGIN’S NAME WAS MARY. AND
WHEN THE ANGEL HAD COME TO HER, HE
SAID, ‘HAIL, FULL OF GRACE, THE LORD IS
WITH THEE, BLESSED ART THOU AMONG
WOMEN . . . BEHOLD, THOU SHALT CON-
CEIVE IN THY WOMB AND SHALT BRING
FORTH A SON; AND THOU SHALT CALL HIS
NAME JESUS. HE SHALL BE GREAT, AND
SHALL BE CALLED THE SON OF THE MOST
HIGH; AND THE LORD GOD WILL GIVE HIM
THE THRONE OF DAVID HIS FATHER; AND

[
40

]



HE SHALL BE KING OVER THE HOUSE OF
JACOB FOREVER . . . THE HOLY SPIRIT
SHALL COME UPON THEE AND THE POWER
OF THE MOST HIGH SHALL OVERSHADOW
THEE; AND THEREFORE THE HOLY ONE TO
BE BORN SHALL BE CALLED THE SON OF
GOD/ ” Luke 1:26-35.

There, you have the sum and the substance of the
Mariology of the Catholic Church. There, dear reader, is

the reason why you should join with Catholics in paying
tribute to this singular vessel of devotion who became, by
divine predilection, the Ark of the New Covenant. The
precedent was set by God himself.

Think of the extreme high honor conferred on Mary
by Our Lord God! He gave her the first human knowl-
edge of the Coming of Salvation ... for nine months
He, Divinity, took up residence in her body ... for
many more months He fed at her breast, reposed in her
arms, submitted to her guardianship, even subjected him-

self to her will (Luke 2:51). For her our Blessed Lord

performed His first public miracle, even though the time

for public miracles had not yet arrived (John 2:1-11 ). For

her He gave His last thought as He hung dying on the
Cross (John 19:26-27). It is difficult to imagine how God
could have honored her more than He did.
But aren’t Catholics going a little too far with their

adulation of Mary when they call her “Mother of
God” and “Mother of Christians?” No, dear reader, not
unless Sacred Scripture was wrong in calling her Mother
of God (Luke l:i3), not unless Christ himself was wrong
in designating her Mother of Christians (John 19:27),
not unless the vast majority of Christians since the

beginning of Christianity have been wrong in calling her

Mother of God and Mother of Christians.

Check the progress of Christianity and you will find

that Protestants are the only ones who consider her un-

[41]



worthy of these titles—modern day Protestants that is;
the old time Protestants considered her very worthy.

Wrote Martin Luther in his Deutsche Schriften: “There-

fore, in a word, all dignities are embraced in Mary when

we call her the Mother of God.” Wrote John Calvin in

his Comm, sur VHarrn: “We cannot acknowledge the

blessings brought us by Jesus without acknowledging at

the same time how highly God honored and enriched

Mary in choosing her for the Mother of God.”

If you think the Catholic Church has gone overboard

these past few centuries in its devotion to the Mother

of our Divine Saviour—if you think the Catholic Church
has introduced something new into the Christian order

of things— consider the attitude of the primitive Church.
Ambrose, one of the most illustrious of the primitive

Church Fathers, had this to say about Mary: “Oh, the

riches of Mary ... As a cloud she waters the earth

with the rain of Christ’s grace. For it has been written

of her: ‘Lo, the Lord cometh seated upon a light cloud’

(Isa. 19:1) . . . She was indeed light who carried in

her womb the Remission of Sins . . . Run after this good

cloud, for within her she has brought forth a fountain

to water the face of the earth . . . Prepare yourselves

as vessels of the Lord that you may receive this fountain

of living water, the source of virginity, the healing balm

of integrity, the perfume of faith and the sweet flower-

ing of gracious mercy” (The Instruction of a Virgin , PL,

16, 325—26) . Then there is this beautiful eulogy by St.

Germanus of Constantinople: “0 Lady, all-chaste, all-

good, rich in mercy, comfort of Christians, tender con-

soler of the afflicted, the ever-open refuge of sinners,

do not leave us destitute of thy assistance . . . Shelter

us under the wings of thy goodness. By thy intercession

watch over us” (Sermon at the consecration of a church

to the Holy Mother of God). If space permitted the

author could quote similar statements by Ignatius, Poly-

[
42

]



carp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr and many other venerable
Fathers of the primitive Christian Church.

Need the author say more? It should be self-evident

by now that you do indeed need the Mariology of the
Catholic Church for a fuller, richer, more God-pleasing

faith. For there is an old axiom which says: To scorn

the mother is to ofend the son . In the Catholic Church

the Mother of God is not scorned as she is in hundreds
of other “Christian” churches and because of this

Catholics enjoy a special closeness to Him.

[For full explanation of such Catholic doctrines as the

Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, read “Catho-

lic Devotion to Mary Explained,” by R. A. Short— Bellar-
mine Publ. Co. — 20c]

[
43

]



YOU NEED THE

PEACE
OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Here is an intriguing question: Just what is it about

the Catholic Church that gives her her great universal

appeal? Everyone, even her bitterest enemies, will con-

cede that she has that. The spectacle of her 475 million

members from every walk of life, representing three-

fifths of all Christianity, one-fifth of the total world

population, is evidence which cannot easily be ignored.

Is the appeal of the Catholic Church due to her beauti-

ful cathedrals and shrines, the greatest architectural

works of art on the face of the earth? Is it due to the

awe-inspiring splendor of her liturgies and processions,

the most colorful sight outside of nature’s own realm that

man can witness? Or to take a look “inside” Catholicism

does her popularity stem from her cogent, forceful and

uncompromising teachings, the most comprehensive guide

to living ever offered to mankind?

No doubt these things do command a certain admira-

tion and probably contribute a great deal toward culti-

vating interest in the Catholic religion. People naturally

lean toward the beautiful and the strong. But surprisingly

it is not these that pull the trigger of final assent in the

minds of millions of converts year after year all over

the world. No, the main factor in the popularity of the

Catholic Church is something vastly more alluring and

positive.

Ask the Catholic convert sometime. He or she will tell

you that their primary motive for embracing the Catholic

faith is the incomparable PEACE the Catholic faith
produces in the soul. Confusion and despair, loneliness

[
44

]



and melancholy, these have no place in the life of the
Catholic. In the lives of devout Catholics they are, in
fact, unknown states of mind.
There can be no such disorder in the soul when one

is given a positive, consummate awareness of the Reality
of God and His loving solicitude. And that is what the
Catholic Church gives to her own. In the Catholic
Church suspicion and guesswork are ruled out altogether.
The whole order of creation is brought into clear and
beautiful focus and the Catholic beholds in the midst
of it all the sublime, the only completely reasonable pur-
pose of his existence. No longer must he grope and
flounder through life like a ship on a tempestuous sea
without a compass. He knows where he is headed and
he knows that he has a skilled and experienced navigator
to take him there. His is a wonderful feeling of safety.
Nor does the Catholic rest his convictions on the

authority of some fly-by-night theorist. He rests his con-
victions on the authority of a mighty two-thousand year
old institution that has produced not only the world’s
greatest theological and metaphysical minds but legions
of saints without parallel in the history of the human
race. His convictions rest on the authority of that Church
which alone can furnish positive historical proof that it
was founded and constituted, not by some ambitious
human, but by the God-man, Jesus Christ himself. In
short, the Catholic has the supreme satisfaction of
knowing that his convictions rest on the most reliable
authority of all.

Yes, the peace of soul the Catholic Church gives her
sons and daughters constitutes her real appeal; but it
is a peace that must be traced to its first source to be
fully understood and appreciated. The first source of this
great blessing is found in the Church’s vitals: the Mass,
the sacraments, the benedictions, the rosaries, the Sta-
tions of the Cross and the litanies to God and His
heavenly court. Especially is it to be found in the Mass,

[
45

]



for it is here that the Catholic faithful meet Christ their

Saviour face to face in the Holy Eucharist. When a

Catholic participates in these solemnities he is at once

removed from all the superficialities of the world. He

experiences an intimacy with God that is joyously real

and quite beyond compare. His whole being is refreshed

and exhilarated, as a draught of cool water refreshes and

exhilarates a man just off a burning desert. He is given

a new lease on life—he is given peace , the true peace
that only complete reconciliation with God can produce.

Here is the explanation for the almost total absence

of Catholics in mental hospitals. In the U.S.A.,
for

example, less than three per cent of the people committed

to mental hospitals during the ten year period
just

ended were Catholics, although Catholics comprised 27

per cent of the population. Also significant is the
fact

the Catholics comprised less than one per cent of
the

patients afflicted with paranoia (chronic hallucinations)

and dementia praecox (deteriorated mentality) . Then

there is the 1952 report of the non-partisan World Health

Organization, an affiliate of the United Nations, which

gave the lowest suicide rate in the world to the countries

with the highest percentage of Catholic population.
What

could be stronger proof of the stabilizing, strengthening

influence of Catholicism on the mind?

Peace of mind and soul is indeed a most precious

commodity. People strive for this more than for any

thing else in this world. They look for it everywhere, in

seclusion, in wealth, in power, in a great assortment

of philosophical and philanthropical associations and
in

a great assortment of religions. But the place where most

people find it is in the Catholic Church, within the Mys-

tical Body of Him who in very truth is the Fountainhead

of all true peace.

[
46

]



Quedttonl a+td A+vUu&U.

Do Catholics confess all the sordid details of their
sins to the priest?

No. Catholics are instructed not to confess the details
of their sins because it would serve no useful purpose.
All that is expected of the penitent is the classification
of sins committed, a sincere expression of sorrow and
a firm resolve to avoid future occasions of sin.

What else takes place in the confessional?

The priest gives spiritual advice, specifies certain prayers
of penance and then, while the penitent prays the Act
of Contrition, bestows Absolution. The Absolution cer-
tifies that God, through His Church, has forgiven the
penitent’s sins.

What advantage does confessing ones sins to a
priest in the Sacrament of Penance have over con-
fessing directly to God in private prayer?

There are several advantages. First, there is the Church
of God’s guarantee of forgiveness which private confes-
sions do not provide; secondly, there is the expert coun-
seling which private confessions do not provide; thirdly,
there is the sacramental grace which private confessions
do not provide.

[
47

]



Why does the priest celebrate the Mass in Latin

instead of the language of the people?

Latin is the one language which does not
change over

the centuries, therefore the Mass is celebrated in
Latin

to help preserve the original purity
of the Mass liturgy.

The congregation has a translation of the Mass Latin in

their missal which they bring to Mass so they are able

to follow and understand everything the priest
says.

Is the Mass exclusively in Latin?

No. All parish announcements, the Scripture
readings, the

sermon and several prayers incidental to the
Mass are in

the language of the congregation.

If the Catholic religion is so spiritually
rewarding

how explain the Catholics who fall away and be-

come Protestants?

There always has been and there always
will be defec-

tions from God’s true Church, people who set
aside spir-

itual considerations in favor of
material gain, to please

non-believing wives, husbands and sweethearts,
to show

their disdain for authority or to
gratify offended pride.

When such people join another church they do not
be-

come a credit to that church.

Why are Catholics forbidden to attend non-Catholic

church services?

To discourage hypocrisy. It would be very
hypocritical

for a Catholic to believe that his is the
true Church of



Jesus Christ, which he must believe before he can call
himself a Catholic, and then take part in the services
of another church.

Would it not also be hypocritical for a Protestant
to attend Catholic serv ices?

No. because Protestants do not believe that any one
Christian church is Christ’s true Church. Protestants be-
lieve that Christ’s true Church is an interdenominational
church embracing all Christian churches, including the
Catholic Church. Accordingly they feel, or should feel,

just as much at home at Catholic services as at Protestant
services.

Why are Catholics forbidden to join the Masonic
Order?

The Masonic Order is out of bounds to Catholics for two
reasons: (1) it has religious underpinnings that are thor-

oughly inimical to the Catholic conscience. For example:

it espouses God negatively, identifying Him not as the
Holy Trinity but as “The Great Architect of the Uni-
verse”— this in order to appease and attract Jews, Mos-
lems, Pantheists and what not. In the Catholic conscience
there can be no compromise, no appeasement, on the
question of God’s true identity; Jesus Christ and the
Holy Spirit must needs be recognized. (2) the Masonic
Order has throughout its history opposed the Catholic

Church. This opposition has not been so great in this

country but in many other countries, notably France and
Mexico, it has resulted in the closing of Catholic churches

and schools and the confiscation of Church properties
when Masons captured control of the civil government.
Catholics are not the only Christian religionists who re-

[
49

]



gard membership in the Masonic Order as inimical to the

Christian ideal. Lutherans and Baptists share this opinion.

Why don’t Catholic priests marry?

Catholic priests do not marry for several reasons; first

because Christ, the divine High Priest, is the model, the

Archtype, for the Catholic priesthood and He lived a

celibate life; secondly, because the Apostles endorsed

the celibate life for priests (1 Cor. 7:32-33); and thirdly,

because their rigorous schedule would impose a tre-

mendous and unfair hardship on a wife. Clerical celibacy

is not, however, a dogma of faith. In certain areas of

the Catholic Church and under certain conditions priests

are permitted to have wives.

What is the purpose of convents, monasteries and

religious orders in the Catholic Church?

Convents and monasteries provide a refuge where Cath-

olics who wish to dedicate their lives entirely to prayer

and contemplation of God can do so without worldly dis-

tractions. Religious orders provide specialized services

for the Church such as missionary work, teaching in

schools, nursing, caring for the poor and aged, etc.

Why do Catholics abstain from eating meat on Fri-

day?

Catholics make this sacrifice on Friday to commemorate

and honor Christ’s sacrifice on that day. It is a practice

that dates back to the earliest days of the Church. Ter-

tullian and Clement of Alexandria both mention it in

their writings. Meatless Fridays do not imply that there

[
50

]



is anything wrong with eating meat. On other days
Catholics eat just as much meat as other people.

Why is the Catholic Church opposed to divorce?

The Catholic Church is opposed to divorce because Christ
opposed it (Matt. 19:4-8)

,
because marriage is not just a

contract between two people but a contract between two
people and God, because divorce creates broken homes
which are responsible for the greatest part of the world’s
loneliness and child delinquency.

Are not the marriage annulments granted by the
Catholic Church a form of divorce?

No, the marriage annulments granted by the Catholic
Church are declarations that the marriage, having been
entered into under duress or false pretense, being there-
fore fraudulent, never did exist in fact.

Why is the Catholic Church opposed to birth con-
trol?

The Catholic Church is not opposed to birth control when
it is accomplished by natural means, i.e., by abstinence
and continence. She is opposed only to birth control by
unnatural means, by the employment of chemicals, me-
chanical devices and deliberate physical impairment, be-
cause such means violate the Will of God by disrupting
His creative processes and shames the human race by
making human life an accident of carnal passion rather
than an intention of parental love. Think of the many
great statesmen, educators and religious leaders whose

[
51

]



entrance into the world was prevented by a cheap con-

traceptive. Think of the many people who owe their

existence to the failure of a cheap contraceptive.

Why is the Catholic Church opposed to the mar-
riage of Catholics to people of other religious

faiths?

The Catholic Church does not strictly forbid the marriage

of Catholics to people of other religious faiths but she

does strongly advise against it, because the records show

that opposing religious views is one of the chief causes of

marital friction and divorce. The only way to avoid this

calamity is for one or both of the partners to compromise,

to give ground, on their religious feelings and that results

in a calamity of another and graver sort: it results in the

willful disobedience of what is believed to be the Will

of God, that is it puts duty to wife and husband before

duty to God.

Why do Catholics believe in the necessity of good
works? Does not the Bible say that faith alone justi-

fies?

Catholics believe in the necessity of good works, acts of

charity, because Christ stated very categorically that they

are a condition of salvation. Read Matthew 25:31-46.

Nowhere in the Bible is it stated that faith alone justi-

fies. When Paul wrote, “We reckon that a man is justified

by faith independently of the works of the Law” (Rom.

3:28), he was referring to the works of the old Jewish

Law, the rite of circumcision, for example. Had Paul

meant that faith ruled out the necessity of charity he

would not have written: “If I have all faith so as to move

mountains, yet do not have charity, I am nothing” (1 Cor.



13:2). If faith ruled out the necessity of good works the
Apostle James would not have written: “Just as the body
without the spirit is dead, so faith without good works
is dead” (James 2:26).

Why don t Catholics claim they are
a
saved” as

many Protestants do?

Catholics do not go around boasting that they are saved
because Sacred Scripture, the Apostles* Creed and plain
elementary logic all assert that it is God, not we our-
selves, who is the judge of whether or not we are saved,
and His judgment is not made known to us until after our
life in this world has been spent, until the complete
record of our loyalty to Him is in His hands. Wrote the
Apostle Paul: “I do not judge my own self. I have
nothing on my conscience, yet I am not justified in
judging myself; for he who judges me is the Lord. There-
fore, pass no judgment before the time, until the Lord
comes” (1 Cor. 4:3-5).

Is it true that Protestant missionaries are persecuted

by the Catholic Church in Spain and Colombia?

Thousands of Protestant missionaries have been sent to
predominantly Catholic countries in the past decade. The
vast majority have conducted themselves in a dignified,
respectful manner and have not been molested. A few
radicals have openly, persistently, flaunted local ordi-
nances and brazenly attacked the deep rooted religious
faith of the populace with the result that they were run
out of town or out of the country, the same as Catholic
missionaries from the U.S.A. would be run out of town or
out of the country if they entered Sweden, for example,



and openly attacked the Lutheran Church. Significant is

the fact that the vast majority of Protestant missionaries

in Spain, Colombia and other predominantly Catholic

countries do not complain of being persecuted.

Why do Catholics build their own schools?

Catholics look upon the public school system in this

country as good, efficient and essential to the American

way of life, which is why Catholics give it their whole-

hearted support. But the public schools do not provide

instruction in the teachings of Jesus Christ, an area of

learning which Catholics consider essential to the Catholic

way of life. Therefore they build their own schools, not

as a substitute for public schools but as a supplement to

public schools. The American public can be thankful for

this because it relieves the public tax burden by hundreds

of millions of dollars.

What is the attitude of the Catholic Church toward

science?

The answer to that is to be found in the great modern

laboratories in the hundreds of Catholic universities

throughout the world and the renowned scientists pro-

duced by those universities. Some of the greatest scien-

tists were Catholic priests. Hauy, the father of scientific

crystallography, was a Catholic priest. Ampere, the dis-

coverer of a way to measure electricity, was a Catholic

priest. Mendel, who pioneered the study of heredity, was

a Catholic priest. Copernicus, world famous astronomer,

was a Catholic priest. Chauliae, father of modern surgery,

was a Catholic priest. Latrelle, foremost entomologist,

was a Catholic priest. Gerbert, father of modern mathe-

matics and inventor of the first mechanically operated

calculating machine, was Pope Sylvester II.

[
54

]



What stand does the Catholic Church take on the

Theory of Evolution?

The Catholic Church takes the same stand that all ra-

tionalists take; viz. that the Theory of Evolution is yet

no more than a theory but one which affords an interest-

ing and challenging field for experimental science. It is

not very likely but should it be conclusively proved that

the physical form of modern man, along with the physical

form of other modern species of life, evolved from radi-

cally different physical forms, being shaped by many

thousands of years, perhaps millions of years, of habit,

environmental and genetical influences, it would in no

way disturb the doctrinal precepts of the Catholic Church

which hold that it is the soul of man, not his outward

form, that distinguishes him as a special creation of God.

What is the Catholic attitude toward drinking alco-

holic beverages?

Catholic moralists take the position that moderate drink-

ing of alcohol beverages for sake of health or sociability

is not wrong. If it was wrong Christ would not have pro-

vided wine for the wedding feast of Cana (John 2:1-10)

,

nor would the Apostle Paul have recommended wine “for

thy stomach’s sake and thy frequent infirmities” (1 Tim.

5:23). Excessive drinking that results in drunkenness and

deprivation, however, is considered a very grave sin,

even as the Apostles considered it a very grave sin

(Rom. 13:13, Gal. 5:21).

[
55

]



What is the Catholic attitude toward gambling?

When one can afford it gambling is not evil. When one

cannot afford it, when there is the chance that wife and

family will be deprived of the necessities of life and

legitimate debts left unpaid, then gambling is definitely

evil. If gambling was intrinsically evil in itself then the

purchase of corporation stocks, businesses and certain

types of insurance would be evil because they too involve

financial risk, a gamble. Whether or not some forms of

gambling should be outlawed or rigidly controlled should

be left up to the civil authorities to decide because condi-

tions vary in the different localities.

What is the Catholic attitude toward dancing and

attending the theater?

The Catholic Church is vigorously opposed to sexy, sug-

gestive forms of dancing that incite carnal passion but

she holds that dignified, convivial and modest forms of

dancing are both permissible and commendable. Likewise

with motion pictures and stage plays. If they have an

immoral plot, or a plot that strongly suggests or glorifies

immorality, they are evil and can be occasions of sin. If

they are good wholesome and educational entertainment

they can be of great benefit. The Catholic Church holds

that it is just as moral to witness a show with a good

Christian theme in a public theater as it is to witness it in

a church hall.

[
56

]



Wasn’t the Protestant Reformation justified in view

of the worldliness of the Catholic Church at the
time?

No, the Protestant Reformation was not justified. Better
that the Christian community be up to its neck in worldli-
ness than be broken up into hundreds of separate and
rival camps, crippled to the extent that a thousand years
may pass before it can once again present a united front
in the cause of Christ. For it only takes a little conscience
and a little time for a unified Christian society to cure
itself of worldliness— the Catholic Reformation brought
about at the Council of Trent in 1545-63 proved that—
but it takes a lot of conscience and consequently a lot of
time for many separated Christian societies to cure them-
selves of the disease of isolationism— the ancient and
still separated Coptic churches prove that. Take a good
look at the state of affairs in the Christian community
today and it will become immediately apparent that what
Luther, King Henry the Eighth and the other leaders of
the Protestant revolt accomplished was no reformation
of the Christian ideal but a tragic deformation.

If the Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth as Cath-

olics claim why does he not emulate the simplicity
of Christ instead of surrounding himself with pomp
and luxury?

What pomp? What luxury? Is it pomp to work sixteen
hours a day, shouldering the burden of the world’s highest
religious office, receiving a steady stream of tourists, pil-
grims and statesmen in audience, worrying over the fate
of millions of Christians being trodden under the heel of
Communism? Is it luxury to live in a simple four room
apartment and never be able to leave on vacation, a

[
57

]



virtual prisoner? The Pope is the Vicar of Christ all right

— that has been proved elsewhere in this booklet— and
he is living as simply as he can without jeopardizing the

efficiency of his great office.

What is meant by the “Infallibility” of the Pope?

The Infallibility of the Pope means that he can make no

mistake when, speaking ex cathedra as the successor of

St. Peter the Apostle, he defines Christian doctrine. It

means that he, the foremost authority in the Church of

Jesus Christ, is protected by the Holy Spirit of God from

errors of judgment that would result in the corruption of

the deposit of faith bequeathed to the Church— accord-
ingly as this protection was promised. To the Apostle

Peter Our Lord said: “Whatever thou shalt bind on earth

shall be bound in heaven, and whatever thou shalt loose

on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 16:19). To the

Apostolic teaching authority of His Church Our Lord

said: “The Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father

will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and
bring to your mind whatever I have said to you ... he

will bear witness concerning me, and you also will bear

witness, because from the beginning you are with me”

(John 15:26-27). The Infallibility of the Pope does not

meaji that he is immune to errors of judgment in other

matters or that he is incapable of committing sin.

If the Catholic religion became the dominant re-

ligion in the United States would it be tolerant of

other religions?

If the Catholic Church became the dominant religion in

the United States she would adopt the same policy to-

[
58

]



wards other religions as she does in countries now pre-

dominantly Catholic: she would not assist them but she

would not constrain them. In Rome, in the very shadow

of the Vatican, the Waldensian Church has existed for

eight hundred years without interference from the Catho-

lic Church. In Italy, France, Ireland, Portugal, Philip-

pines and all of the South American countries the Catho-

lic religion dominates and other religions enjoy perfect

freedom. The Catholic Church holds that one of the in-

herent rights of man is the right to follow the dictates of

his conscience.

If the Catholic Church believes in the inherent right

of the individual to follow the dictates of his or her

conscience how explain the cruel heresy trials of

the Inquisition?

The heretics who were tried, tortured and sometimes

executed during the Inquisitions that took place first in

Italy and then later in Spain were not treated that way

simply because of their religious nonconformity but pri-

marily because their religious extremism led them to what

was considered to be serious crimes against society and

the state. For example, the Cathari and Albigensian sects

of Italy repudiated marriage and advocated suicide. In

Spain it was discovered that a group of Moors and

psuedo-Jews had joined the Catholic Church and become

priests and bishops in order to camouflage subversive

activities against both Church and state. The Catholic

Church exposed these radicals but the sentencing and the

punishment were carried out by the state. The punishment

inflicted may appear cruel and inhuman to the modem
mind but at the time it was the conventional mode of

punishment for the crimes committed. Our gallows, elec-

[ 59 ]



trie chairs and gas chambers will probably be looked

back upon with equal horror a few hundred years from

now. Our government's suppression of the Mormon

polygamists and the Canadian government's suppression

of the Doukhobor nudists will probably be looked back

upon with equal horror by the “civil liberty” exponents

of a few hundred years from now.

Do Catholics believe that Protestants and other

non-Catholic religionists are ineligible for heaven?

Positively not. Catholics believe that those of other re-

ligious faiths who earnestly strive to comply with the

Divine Will and who die repentant of their sins will share

in the heavenly reward.

Why become a Catholic then if one can attain
eternal salvation outside of the Catholic Church?

Other religionists who earnestly strive to comply with the

Divine Will are not outside of the Catholic Church. They

are not members of the visible Catholic Church but by

implicit desire, because they are not aware that the visible

Catholic Church is God's one true Church, they belong

to the soul of the Catholic Church. If they were aware

that the visible Catholic Church is God’s one true Church

they would have to belong to it in order to merit eternal

salvation because if they did not they would not be

earnestly striving to comply with the Divine Will. God

would not have founded the Catholic Church if He did

not will that all men should belong to it.

[
60

]



Does belonging to the visible Catholic Church have

any advantages over belonging to the soul of the

Catholic Church?

Definitely. In the visible Catholic Church resides the Real

Presence of Christ, the whole and true Gospel of Christ

and the full complement of the true Sacraments of Christ.

These provide graces which bring one into closer com-

munion with God, thereby increasing one’s disposition to
comply with the Will of God. That membership in the
visible Catholic Church does bring about such a holy
disposition is seen in the fact that 87 per cent of Catholics

attend church regularly as compared to 56 per cent for

Protestants (according to Protestant estimates)— is seen
in the fact that many Catholics attend church daily as
compared to scarce few Protestants who attend church
daily— is seen in the fact that Catholic saints outnum-
ber Protestant saints a hundred to one. In other words, a

person can attain eternal salvation through membership
in the soul of the Catholic Church but membership in the
visible Catholic Church is the safer route.

[
61

]





So why not join the Catholic
Church, dear reader, and share in

this wonderful friendship with

God, this joy of heart, this peace

of soul? Why not "Go, show thy-
self to the priest" as our Blessed

Saviour advised (Luke 5:14) and

let him give you "the pearl of

great price," the beautiful, the

precious, the eternal Catholic

Faith? Do this and 475 million

Catholics promise you that you

will never cease being thankful,

never cease singing in your heart,

"Ah sweet mystery of life at last

I've found thee; ah at last I know
the secret of it all."

MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND
QUICKEN YOUR DECISION



Said Christ to His followers:

HE WHO DOES NOT GATHER WITH
ME SCATTERS. Matt. 12:30.

You can gather with Christ by sending $1.00 with

the names and addresses of five unchurched people

to Bellarmine Publishing Company, Mound, Min-

nesota. Each will be sent a copy of TEN GOOD
REASONS promptly without mention of your

name unless you request your name mentioned.





%Vhat doe£ it

pxofct a man

// he gain the

whole wotId, but

Au^fex the loM

of hi£ own £oul?

Matt. 16:26