The true scandal in the case of Christ Among Us is not so much that the Paulist Press should publish and distribute this compendium of Modernism, but that our bishops should have failed so abysmally to protect their flocks from it. Indeed, their principal concern seems to have been to defend the book from the criticism of their people. Now these same bishops have the temerity to set themselves up as the vigilant guardians of orthodoxy! Who do they think they are kidding? We are extremely grateful to Emanuel Valenza for providing us with a critique of some of the worst errors in Anthony Wilhelm's book. We recommend careful study.

 

Christ Among Us typifies the revolution in the Church today. Traditional teachings of the Church are rejected, usually with an appeal to Vatican II, one's conscience, modern man's maturity, or the absence of such teachings in the Bible and/or Tradition. Let us examine what Wilhelm has to say on some subjects:

The Kingdom of God

The term "Kingdom of God" is used in different senses. In the New Testament, the phrase refers to the visible kingdom of the Catholic Church; the invisible kingdom of God present in individuals who have God's grace; and the kingdom of heaven.

Wilhelm all but restricts the meaning of the phrase "Kingdom of God" to the invisible reign of God in those who have His grace. He writes: "God's reign or kingdom is his guiding presence, his grace-presence within us; to submit to his loving guidance is to belong to the kingdom" (p. 72). Again: "But when Christ revealed that his kingdom was an interior, spiritual one, only a comparative few accepted him" (p. 72). "This is the 'kingdom of God' which Christ preached: God's grace-presence within us. To have God's grace-presence within us is to belong to the kingdom," writes Wilhelm (p. 193).

But the kingdom which Christ referred to over and over again was the Kingdom of Heaven, not His reign in the hearts of men. This kingdom belongs to the poor in spirit (Matt. 5:3). So is the place which God prepared for the just from the foundation of the world (Matt. 25:34). Rich men will enter this kingdom with much difficulty (Luke 18:24). The Apostles will judge the twelve tribes of Israel in heaven (Luke 22:30). At the Second Coming, the kingdom will be consummated (Apoc. 19:11-16). Christ taught us to pray for the coming of the kingdom.

Yet Wilhelm refers to the triumphant reign of God only once: "One day in heaven the kingdom will be completed . . ." (p. 73).

Many of Christ's parables identify the kingdom with the Catholic Church. For example: the parable of the mustard seed (Matt. 13: 31); the parable of the net cast into the sea (Matt. 13:47); and the parable of the grain and the weeds (Matt. 13:24).

Wilhelm claims to write a presentation of the Catholic Faith, yet he never identifies the Kingdom of God with the Catholic Church. Strange.

Furthermore, Wilhelm errs when he remarks that Christ gave the power of the keys to the Apostles: "He [Christ] gave them [the apostles] 'the keys of the kingdom,' the power to guide men to his truth and love" (p. 73). Christ gave the power of the keys to Peter alone; by this act Peter was granted supreme authority in the Catholic Church. It is especially through this act of Christ that He identifies the Kingdom of Heaven with the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church, by teaching the doctrine of Christ and ministering the means of grace instituted by Him, is the Kingdom of God in its external, visible reality. It is the Catholic Church which has the ordinary means of producing the reign of God in the souls of men and the power to ready them for the Kingdom of Heaven.

Wilhelm's understanding of the Kingdom of God is thoroughly Protestant, not Catholic.

The Church

Wilhelm's conception of the Church is similar to his understanding of the Kingdom of God. He writes: "This is what the Church really is: Christ among us, working through his Spirit, uniting us to himself and to one another in order to bring us to his Father . . . The Church is simply Christ reaching us through his Spirit with his teaching and grace-presence—and the way we return with him to the Father . . . The Church, then, is Christ and all those who are united with him in the Spirit" (p. 129).

Since this definition of the Church does not take into consideration the hierarchical nature of Holy Mother Church, it allows Wilhelm to support the implementation of some revolutionary ideas.

1. The distinction between priest and layman should be done away with. He writes:

The once clear distinction between priestly leaders and people whose role was mainly to follow, is gradually disappearing. We are coming to realize that each member has something to contribute, and often the contribution of a layperson in a particular matter is more vital than that of a priest or religious. We are coming to see that the Spirit speaks and acts through all, particularly where "two or three are gathered together" as a group in his name. It is also becoming clear that the special way of dress, titles, separate living facilities, etc. which are generally part of the priesthood today, while often helpful, need not be necessary to the priest's role in the community and sometimes may in fact be a hindrance to his work (p. 355).

2. Wilhelm obviously feels that celibacy "need not be necessary to the priest's role in the community, and sometimes may be a hindrance to his work" because he writes that ". . . many in the Church today recognize that there is no necessary connection, historically or pastorally, between the priesthood and celibacy . . . Many feel that good men are being eliminated from the priesthood because of celibacy (p. 353).

3. Everyone should be welcomed at the councils of the Church: "Today many wish to have future councils or their equivalent open to lay participation, pointing out that a council should truly represent the whole Church. The Church itself is the 'council' called together by God, comprising the whole people of God. As many levels as possible should be present at these gatherings, pope, hierarchy, priests, religious, and people of all sorts: married, unmarried, scientists, laborers, etc." (p. 144).

Although Wilhelm discusses the hierarchical nature of the Catholic Church, his definition of the Church as "Christ and all those who are united with him in the Spirit," and his radical ideas, which to a certain extent flow organically from his Protestant definition of the Church, reveal that he favors a decleracalized Catholic Church in which virtually every level of society has input into how the Church should be run as well as what it should or should not believe.

Faith

There is nothing remotely Catholic about Wilhelm's understanding of the Faith.

First, he writes that doubt can co-exist with Catholic Faith: "Faith is not knowledge that frees us from the proddings of doubt"(p. 210). Again: "Doubts about God, then, must be expected even by believers who try to know and love him faithfully. Faith must grow, and growth is often uncertain, painful" (p. 12).

Secondly, Wilhelm distinguishes between a childish and mature faith:

The believer bred in the Christian faith must often painfully discard the uncomplicated faith of childhood and adolescence, and form a new, adult, simpler, deeper, more mature and realistic belief. This means for many a "crisis of faith"—usually in the late teens or early twenties, though it can come earlier or later—often involving a rejection of many of the Church's "rules" and structures.

The believer for the first time faces a challenge to what he has always accepted. He sees now that he must be personally involved in and committed to living what he professes. He examines his beliefs critically, testing their power and relevance in his life. He sees the weaknesses of the Church, the mediocrity of many Christians, and the dedication of many unbelievers. He may find the Church's moral code difficult to live with and he wonders if it is not largely unrealistic. He must now distinguish the core of Christian belief from what is peripheral, the teachings of Christ from the weak human instruments who propose them, the Christian faith as he may have been taught it from what it really is (p. 210).

Make no mistake, Wilhelm is a "mature" Christian. He is able to distinguish the "core" of the Faith from what is "peripheral." Here are some more beliefs of Anthony Wilhelm, self-professed mature Christian:

•  He calls the separation of the Red Sea by God a "natural event" (p. 47); the plagues on Egypt are referred to as "natural yearly occurrences that could be interpreted as divine interventions" (p. 47).

•  Devotion to the saints is a peripheral part of Catholicism: "Devotion to the saints is one of the less-important and strictly optional practices of Catholicism," he writes (p. 367).

•  Mary is not the Mother of all mankind: "We give special place to Mary's intercession and sometimes consider her our spiritual 'mother' " (p. 369).

•  There is no place like Hell:

Theology has no complete answer as to how, or even whether anyone may be damned forever. Many scholars, and ordinary people as well, feel that no one is damned; they cannot conceive of a person choosing with full knowledge and deliberation to be cut off from God forever. Nor can they conceive of a loving God damning anyone forever (p. 289).

•  Do angels and devils exist? Wilhelm is not certain: "Today, theology is restudying the whole question of angels and devils. Perhaps scripture simply presupposes angels and devils as part of the biblical milieu, rather than directly affirming their actual existence as part of God's revelation. Nor does the existence of angels and devils seem to be a part of the strictly dogmatic teaching of the Church. The numbers and varieties which are mentioned may well be mythological exaggerations. And yet it is hard to dismiss the reality itself, so firmly rooted is it in the long tradition and liturgy of the Church" (p. 27).

•  The soul is not created directly by God and infused at the moment of conception: "Each person's soul is a special 'aspect' of God's continuing creation of the universe—an individual spiritual power that comes about by the evolutionary process which God began, working itself out in each of us. In the thinking of the great priest-paleontologist, Teilhard de Chardin, and others, the human soul first came about at the critical point of evolution when a primate became able to reflect on himself—and hence became human, a man, free and immortal, able to think and choose, however primitively, and to relate to others and to God" (p. 24)

•  "The sin in a homosexual relationship," writes Wilhelm, "as with all sexuality, comes when it is a stunting process, a lustful or mutually narcissistic escape from the responsibility of human growth" (p. 330).

•  Wilhelm defines mortal sin as "a fundamental choice of ourself over God that engages us to the depths of our being" (p. 284). He concludes: "Most would rarely, if ever, make a fundamental and lasting choice of their way over God's" (ibid.)

The only conclusion one can draw is that Wilhelm believes that most people never commit mortal sins.

•  If one does not agree with the teaching of the Church, he should try to change it:

There may be extraordinary situations in which a Catholic, after sincere attempt and discussion with theological teachers, cannot make his own some authoritative, non-infallible teaching (e.g., the present papal teaching on birth control); he cannot reconcile it with his grasp of the total gospel preached by the Church. He should then tell his convictions to his spiritual leaders and responsibly work toward a revision of the Church' position. This can be a difficult process in which one has no certitude about how to proceed (p. 152).

Moreover, Wilhelm asserts that the Church's teaching on birth control—indeed, any of its teaching—can change: "In this matter, as in anything, the Church has not spoken the final word, and a development of its teaching in view of changed modern conditions is quite possible. No question of infallibility is involved" (p. 332).

Needless to say, "development" here means to "change." But the Church's teaching on birth control will never change. It is the constant teaching of the Church that birth control is an intrinsically evil act because it perverts the generative and unitive aspects of the marital act through its voluntary interruption (onanism) or the use of chemicals or mechanical instruments.

Wilhelm looks upon the Church's teaching on marriage, divorce and premarital intercourse as "ideals" which can be disobeyed if one cannot carry them out. He writes:

•  Marriage is a covenant, ideally monogamous and permanent (p. 316).

•  But some couples must face the agony of divorce—they realize they are destroying themselves and perhaps their children and have no alternative but to separate and begin a new life. Particularly today, in our unstable society, this is often the decision—painful but courageous—that many people will have to make (p. 319).

•  To many in the Church it seems inhuman to require that divorced people, except for the few exceptions, remain unmarried for the rest of their lives. While the Church needs to uphold the permanence of marriage as the ideal for the ultimate good of human society, it would seem that it has to realistically recognize that some cannot live up to this ideal, particularly in today's unstable society (p. 320).

•  Premarital chastity is the Christian ideal . . . (p. 322).

•  The act of intercourse is the fullest possible physical expression of the couple's total giving to each other. The Christian ideal, then, is that it should take place when there has been the public, total and final commitment of one to the other in the marriage ceremony (p. 323).

But premarital intercourse is not wrong if the couple intends to stay together. Wilhelm writes:

Some couples feel that they have a deep, mature and permanent commitment to one another before the marriage ceremony—and often it has its consummation in the sexual union—and in the judgment of the couple this is not wrong. Their permanent, unconditional commitment (not the instability of trial or companionate marriage) draws them to a fuller expression of their love. Priests who are counselling couples, while they must present the Church's ideal regarding this, also realize that what is a beautiful and attainable ideal for one couple may be deeply frustrating and disruptive for another. Each couple, in dialogue with God, will have to do what they are capable of. Discipline is always necessary, and the realization that there will always be difficulty in attaining any ideal. Yet, we must face the fact that individuals and their moral capacities do differ; while there are objective moral norms to guide us, not everyone can follow these equally (pp. 323-24).

Wilhelm's faulty misunderstanding of how individuals sin in the realm of sex leads him to condone divorce, premarital intercourse, homosexuality, and contraception as not necessarily wrong. "Sinfulness enters into sexuality," he writes," when one uses it to take advantage of another, or uses another for one's own selfish ends, as an object of one's lust, hostility, or the need to build one's own ego" (p. 324).

It follows from this definition that if we treat another person with love, admiration, and respect, and sincerely try to make this person happy while avoiding our own selfish ends, then we are not committing sin—no matter what we do with that person. But evil acts such as sodomy, artificial birth control, and premarital intercourse do not become morally good simply because the individuals involved are not treated as a means of satisfying one's lust, or of one's ego. These acts are evil because the sexual powers of man are used in a way that God forbids.

For Wilhelm, the Church's teaching authority is there only as a guide, and one need not follow her. In fact, Wilhelm says that one should not follow the Magisterium because it is lost; it is not leading us along the right path. According to Wilhelm, if one allows himself to be his own guide, he is more likely to reach his destination. Although Christ empowered His Church to teach authoritatively and said, "He who hears you, hears me," so that when we follow the revealed teachings of the Church we are following the teachings of Christ, Wilhelm encourages people to forsake the ordinary path to heaven in favor of one's path—a supposedly easier and more direct path to heaven. But such a path leads a person to only one place—Hell!

Oh—but we almost forgot—Wilhelm does not believe in hell. He thinks everyone will be saved. In effect, Wilhelm says "do as you please; salvation awaits all of us." How fatuous!

Christ's Identity Crises

According to Wilhelm, Christ gradually became aware of Who He was and what His purpose was in life. He writes:

When he was twelve years old he was missing for three days; Mary and Joseph found him in the temple and asked why he had left them, "Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house?" he replied. Like many a young man today, he had become aware of what his vocation in life was to be (p. 81).

He gradually became more aware of his mission in life . . . (p. 82).

Gradually he was unfolding his innermost self . . . (p. 83).

What he always was and what he basically knew in the depths of his consciousness, that he was divine, he only gradually came to grasp in the context of his life situation . . .

How much Christ's divinity "broke through" or was communicated to his human consciousness is currently the subject of much discussion. Many scholars today look at the scriptural evidence and think that Jesus fully realized his divinity at his resurrection, when he was filled with the Spirit and glorified (p. 86).

What a mockery of Christ! Imagine: Christ is trying to convince others of His divinity and He Himself is unsure of it. Wilhelm, in effect, is ridiculing everything Christ said and did.

When Caiphas said to Christ, "I adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou art the Christ, the Son of God," Jesus replied, "Thou hast said it" (Matt. 26: 63-64). Christ did not reply, "Well . . . basically . . . you see, I am not sure." Nor was Christ unsure of His divinity when He asserted: "I and the Father are One" (John 10:30). "Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:58); "All power is given to me in heaven and on earth" (Matt. 28:18); "And now do thou, Father, glorify me with thyself, with the glory that I had with thee before the world existed" (John 17:5).

If Christ did not always know of His divinity, imagine His shock when He discovered His ability to perform miracles and foretell events—or His inability to sin. Wilhelm's thesis leads to many absurd conclusions which are incompatible with Christ's dignity as the Son of God.

The Church teaches that Christ possessed from the moment of His Conception the Beatific Vision (Denz. 2289). The vision of His Father face-to-face is the reason for Christ's knowledge of His divine Sonship. Hence Christ did not gradually attain knowledge of His divinity.

Mary's Virginity Considered Insignificant

On the virginity of Mary, Wilhelm writes:

However, Mary's virginity should be seen as more than mere physical inviolability. For many today whether Mary is or is not physically a virgin is of small consequence; they see her virginity as symbolizing something far greater, her profound attitude of total openness to God alone, her total consecration of herself to him before anyone and anything else—and in this each of us, virginal or not, has the power to imitate her (p. 68).

The Church does not believe that "whether Mary is or is not a virgin is of small consequence." Our Lady remained a virgin throughout her life: before, during, and after the birth of Christ. All three aspects of Mary's perpetual virginity are articles of faith.

How can Wilhelm doubt Mary's physical virginity and in the same breath tell us that her physical virginity should be viewed in regard to her total consecration to God? The Blessed Virgin's physical virginity is a manifestation of her complete consecration to God. Our Lady also possessed the virtue of virginity—the intention of remaining perfectly chaste throughout her life. Furthermore, she was free from the desires of concupiscence. Therefore the Blessed Virgin's bodily integrity was a sign of her soul's total and unending consecration to the Father. But if Mary was not physically a virgin throughout her life, then she failed in her purpose to maintain perfect chastity and was not free from concupiscence. Her response to God would have been imperfect. In this sense Wilhelm's position is contradictory.

Luther: Catholic After All

Perhaps no one in history abhorred the Church and all she stands for more than Martin Luther. His diatribes against the papacy and the structure of the Church in general are well known. Popes, bishops, and cardinals are referred to as "Roman sodom." One of Luther's pamphlets is entitled "Against the Papacy Established by the Devil" (1545). He once blessed a group of followers, saying: "May the Lord fill you with His blessings and with hatred of the Pope." The Mass "stinks of oblation." Luther said of the Bull Exsurge Domine, which formally condemned forty-one of his propositions, the following: "As for me, the die is cast; I despise alike the favor and fury of Rome; I do not wish to be reconciled with her; or even to hold any communication with her. Let her condemn and burn my books; I, in turn, unless I can find no fire, will condemn and publicly burn the whole pontifical law, that swamp of heresies" (The Catholic Encyclopedia [1913], Vol. IX, art. "Luther").

Furthermore, Luther's hatred of the Church is shown in his complete overhaul of Catholicism and in the abyss which separates his tenets from those of the one true faith. Luther believed that salvation is achieved by faith alone; that the common priesthood of the laity is the only priesthood; that private judgment should be used in religion; that the Bible is the sole rule of faith; that consubstantiation takes place in the Eucharist; that there is no supreme authority in the Church and that the temporal ruler has final authority in ecclesiastical concerns; that man is so depraved because of the Fall that he has no free will and cannot perform good works; that there is no sacrifice in the Mass, no purgatory and no sacrament of confession; that there are no saints; that there is no visible Church; and that ceremonial worship is neither necessary nor beneficial.

How much further removed from Catholicism, both in spirit and doctrine, can one get?

But, according to Wilhelm, Luther was a victim of circumstances beyond his control and—get this—"did not intend to rebel against the Church itself." Wilhelm writes:

Martin Luther, a Catholic priest, joined others in protesting against some of the more flagrant abuses. He did not intend to rebel against the Church itself. His early teaching is a return to genuinely Catholic beliefs that were largely overlooked. But, caught up in this crucial period of history, faced with the intransigence of the papal court, and encouraged by some of the German princes for their own purposes, he was pushed to some extreme views of his own. Today we recognize that he had genuine insights into the nature of Christianity and that his views were not as uncatholic as was once thought (p. 391).

Heresy, Anyone?

The lists of recommended readings at the end of the chapters is a veritable Who's Who among heretics in the Church. Gregory Baum, Richard P. McBrien, Andrew Greeley, Hans Küng, Teilhard de Chardin, Leslie Dewart, Edward Schillebeeckx, Eugene Kennedy, and Daniel Berrigan, among others, provide suggested reading.

Perhaps more scandalous than the book is the imprimatur given it by the infamous Archbishop of Newark, Peter Gerety. According to the Archbishop, Christ Among Us contains no statements that are contrary to faith and morals. Archbishop Gerety is the divinely constituted teacher and judge of the faith in his diocese. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

In the Preface, Wilhelm writes, "The author would be grateful for any comments and suggestions [for the book's] improvement" (p. 3).

Suggestion: When writing "a one-volume, adult level presentation of our beliefs and practices . . ." (p. 3) do justice to the Faith—be orthodox!