My Response to Comments from "Tommy Bach"?

Once again, a particular individual has left comments that undoubtedly need to be addressed clearly and fairly. For what it is worth, the first comment (dated Jan 26) was listed with an address from Wittenberg University in Springfield Ohio, an Evangelical Lutheran School.

Not surprisingly, "the university was created by a group of pastors who broke with the German church and created the English Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Ohio. They believed that the English language was a way to foster the inclusiveness of the new American nation." (Source, Wittenberg, Founding)

The second comment (dated Jan 28) originated from a source in St Louis, some distance from Springfield Ohio...There are two possibilities: 1) Tommy came to St Louis for the weekend and posted from here, or 2) someone in St. Louis has decided to post using Tommy's name...For those who are inclined to engage in such practices, you should be aware that each comment includes the IP Address of the source computer.

Anyway, on with the comments/questions. Since Prodigal Son did not respond to the comment (my suggestion), I felt that this latest "episode" needed to be addressed to clear up any questions raised, especially by the 2nd comment...

----- 1st Comment -----

Please do not cloud my comments with Anonymous. I put my name on my comments for a reason, so that you may adress me directly. Even so, if you know the other to be irrational and false, why do you fuel eachother? You each attack instead of work for understanding.

Having said that i have more questions.

In regard to the word excommunication, it seems that it is just a tool the church uses to blackmail the layity. How can man deprive someone of God’s saving grace? Not even Hitler was excommunicated. Is the church telling me that the actions of the board members of St. Stanislaus were/are worse then the actions of Hitler? Or was Hitler not excommunicated because he had nothing that the church wanted?

Tommy Bach | Email | Homepage | 01.26.06 - 4:07 pm | #

------------------------------------

It is fallacious to suggest that excommunication is a tool to "blackmail" the laity. Such a suggestion demonstrates a fundamental error in using sound reasoning. So then, what is "excommunication"?

Excommunication is an ecclesiastical censure by which one is more or less excluded from communion with the faithful. It is also called anathema, especially if it is inflicted with formal solemnities on persons notoriously obstinate to reconciliation.

Two basic forms of excommunication are legislated by the Code of Canon Law, namely inflicted penalties (ferendae sententiae) and automatic penalties (latae sententiae).

In the first type, a penalty does not bind until after it has been imposed on the guilty party. In the second type, the excommunication is incurred by the very commission of the offense, if the law or precept expressly determines this (Canon 1314).

Most excommunications are of the second type. Among others identified by the new Code are the following:

"An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs automatic excommunication" (Canon 1364).
"A person who throws away the consecrated species or takes them or retains them for a sacrilegious purpose incurs an automatic excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See" (Canon 1367).
"A confessor who directly violates the seal of confession incurs an automatic excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See" (Canon 1388).
"A person who procures a successful abortion incurs an automatic excommunication" (Canon 1398).

There are three principal effects of this penalty, so that an excommunicated person is forbidden:

* to have any ministerial participation in celebrating the Eucharistic Sacrifice or in any other ceremonies whatsoever of public worship
* to celebrate the sacraments and sacramentals and to receive the sacraments
* to discharge any ecclesiastical offices, ministries or functions whatsoever, or to place acts of governance" (Canon 1331).

From Fr. John Hardon's Pocket Catholic Dictionary

"How can man deprive someone of God’s saving grace?" Man deprives himself of this grace everyday. We can see the very first instance of man doing this in the Garden of Eden...And millenia later, man continues to reject God, His laws, His vicars on earth, his parents, his superiors and so by continuing to engage is disobedience and actions contrary to God's will, he incurs a loss of the life of God's grace.

The attempt to inject Hitler into the discussion will not be addressed, at least by me, since it is so absurdly ridiculous.


----- 2nd Comment -----

why have my comments been ignored? Doesn't someone get payed to respond? Where does the money come from that those who run the site get payed with? Isn't it the same money we (the faithful) donate at church each sunday? We (the same faithful) supply for your livelyhood. You work for God but that does not mean you my lord that fact over those who work, to make money, to GIVE to you. If you are occupied with other taskes, then tell who payes you that your service as an insulting fire fueling blog author is a waste of time. Help some one. The reason that I do donate is so people in a possision to help have the resorces to help. What do I see in the news and on t.v.? No where do i see oppurtunities to help or support our fellow men and women but rather Archbishop Burke's pride crusade and how much damage it has done to my faith in you.

Tommy Bach | Email | Homepage | 01.28.06 - 5:15 pm | #

------------------------------------

This comment is vaguely reminiscent of past comments. The insination that there is some sort of financial tie to the Archdiocese is misleading and suggests something which is not quite true. I cannot state for the record that there is not a financial tie to the Archdiocese for, indeed, there is one. I admit that I do contribute to the Archdiocesan Collections and to particular apostolates within the Archdiocese. So the fact that money changes hands - from my hand to others within the Archdiocese - demonstrates, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that there is a financial tie between me and the Archdiocese. By a certain stretch, then, one might conclude a tie between my blog and the Archdiocese, but that would be quite a s-t-r-e-t-c-h...

And, if I recall correctly, similar statements were made by "PolishSTL" (and others) both here and at another site - but then, I would need to verify these to be certain.

Now to the questions, insinuations, and other comments:

1. Regarding the delay in the response, one of the questions has been answered above.

2. Does someone get paid to answer questions? Yes! By the St Stanislaus Board of Directors! And since I haven't been paid yet, I reluctant to respond.

All joking aside, there is no payment of any kind received. As a matter of fact, it costs money and time to do this...Perhaps, if charity can prevail in my heart, God may bestow His blessings on part of the work and on those who help.

3. Any money used to pay for the costs associated for the site comes from my pocket, through the generosity of God. No monetary donations of any kind have ever been sought. The only donations that I willingly seek and accept are articles and stories related in same way to the Catholic Church, Christianity, the promotion and defense of the Faith, etc.

4. Aren't Sunday collections used to pay for this and for my salary? You can't be serious?

5. If you find some things on the blog a little too "hot" for you, maybe there is a reason for that? Perhaps, rather than attack the messenger, you might wish to take a closer look at the message? Sometimes our Lord places before us things which we see negatively or things which we might find repulsive. If one has a will conformed to the will of God, one will see these things in a different light.

6. If you consider the blog a waste of your time, I am a bit perplexed then why you would spend so much time going over it?

7. You state that you see little or nothing on TV or in the news of the Church's attempts to aid those in need...Why do you look there? Do you expect to receive the truth or good news from the media? Have you called any of the various agencies of the Archdiocese to find out what they are doing or what you can do to help or assist?

8. You speak ill of Archbishop Burke when you state publicly that he is engaged in his own "pride crusade"...At the very minimum, this is a rash judgment on your part...The assertion is false and attempts to perpetuate false claims such as this are wrong.

I hope this short response will be satisfactory for the time being. I apologize that I can't spend more time on it at the present but I will try to help if I can when I am not so pressed with other matters.