14 March 2009

Nightline to Debate: Does Satan Exist?

I'm sure ABC will provide the education that 6,000 years of Monotheism and 2,000 years of Christianity have failed to deliver.  I wonder if Burroughs students will be interviewed.  Look for ABC cameras at the prom, kids!


Anonymous said...

I would suggest that anyone who questions the existence of Lucifer find an exorcist and attend the next exorcism he performs.

Anonymous said...


I've know quite a few parish priests who will tell you that Satan is just a myth.

I heard a host on the radio show "Catholic Answers Live" say that Catholic can believe that the whole Noah story, including Noah's every existence, is just a myth.

Another fruit of the "Renewal."


Anonymous said...


How embarrasing that a secular TV show is making public a subject that the vast majority of modern Catholic priests and bishops will never mention!

When was the last time you heard a Catholic priest preach about the existence of Satan and demons, and the way they constantly are attacking us, and pose a real danger to us?

Have you EVER heard a Catholic priest give such a sermon? Ever seen this discussed on ETWN?

I didn't think so.

But the first pope did not hesitate:

"Your enemy the Devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour."

1 Peter 5:8.

By contrast, Jehovah's Witness acquaintances of mine constantly warn people about Satan's constantly attempts to mislead and deceive humans. Now, I'm NOT recommending the Jehovah's Witness religion. It is a false religion. It was started about a 100 years ago by men seeking money and power. The followers today are people who have been duped.

But they will readily show you all the verses in the Bible about Satan, and those verses are real and important.

Why have priests and bishops in the Vatican II Era gone virtually silent about the Devil?


Fr. Andy said...


Satan's existence is doubtless to the Catholic, but the question of Noah as myth comes out of deep and faithful Scripture Scholarship and not the "renewal". I know very faithful and traditional scholars who would say that all up to chapter 11 of Genesis is myth or story to convey the truth of the One God.

Br. Andrew, OP

thetimman said...

Javier, I hear sermons on satan and the ways of resisting him quite often. I think the number of orthodox priests in both forms is on the rise. Certainly we could dwell on the many negatives of the last four decades, but it is undeniable that though crisis remains, there has been significant improvement in the last several years.

Anonymous said...

Br. Andrew,

I do not know if you believe in this, but I don't understand the scripture scholars who do. I have serious questions I'd love to ask them:

What I don't understand about the doubting of Adam and Eve is this: This story explains original sin and the reason we must suffer with pain and death. If there wasn't original sin, then why baptism, and then why did we need salvation by Christ's death?

If we toss out part of the Old Testament, why not the whole thing? Why not the whole Bible? Many people don't believe Jesus' miracles were real, maybe we should doubt that. Some believe he didn't really rise from the dead. . .

Fr. Andy said...


CCC Paragrah 390: "The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents."

The use of figurative language (myth) does little to disrupt the actual meaning and teaching of Original Sin unless you are an absolute biblical fundamentalist and literalist. Something happened at the beginning without a doubt, but even the Church cannot claim certainty as to what that thing actually was other than the exercise of free will against the Will of God.

If one's faith depends on the Bible being an accurate and perfect account of all that happened in history, that faith is most likely in deep trouble in the long run. In my opinion.

Anonymous said...

Br. Andrew,

I did not attack your faith, so I see no reason why you should question mine. I just had legitimate questions that have never been answered fully.

I do not see how you got "myth" out of figurative language. Figurative language can mean that the first sin was not the biting of fruit, or that they wore fig leaves, or even that their names were different, or they did not live in a garden. It doesn't mean that the whole story is untrue.

If the (CCC) "whole of human history is marked by the sin of our FIRST parents," then the story of Adam and Eve is true, even if some of the language may use made up elements to help tell what happened.

My daughter's, Baltimore Catechism No 3, taught to her by a wonderful traditional Latin mass priest states, "There are no persons in the world now, and there never have been any, who are not the descendants of Adam and Eve, because the whole human race had but one origin." I think I'll believe the good and holy priests and catechism, rather than some scripture scholars, or evolutionists who think we evolved from apes.

To me it takes more faith to believe the Bible is true rather than a myth, and there is more harm in the later, as is seen in the homilies of N.O. priests who claim things such as. the "miracle of the loaves and fishes" was not one after all.

Anonymous said...


I am not in communion with anyone who says they are myths, or might be.

Anyone who says that is not a member of the Roman Catholic Church. Period.

My authority: Fr. John F. McCarthy and Fr. Brian Harrison, both of the Archdiocese of St. Louis, at St. Mary of Victories in downtown St. Louis. They have the full support of Archbishop Burke. Father Harrison was ordained by John Paul II.

They have proven in their writings that these modern Scripture "scholars" who say that Noah, Adam and Eve were myths or might be myths are teaching actual HERESY.

Go see these two priests. They will tell you.

Those who don't want to be Catholics should just shift over to the Episcopal Church or the Methodist Church, and be done with it.

Enough is enough.

The business of salvation is serious business. This is not an intellectual parlor game. Hell is no joke.


Fr. Andy said...


If I attacked your faith, that is because you are a biblical fundamentalist, which you prove to be untrue. You see how everyone reads everything in a different light? Javier believes I will burn in hell for holding the same position as Pope Benedict XVI does in his book, "It the Beginning... A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall."

It is of worth to note what we bring to the conversation and study of these eternal truths. Many think that Latin is the only language to use in the liturgy, but knowledge that no book of the Bible was authored in Latin would prove the point that Latin is a modern invention and adaptation. So why use Latin at all?

Our personal likes and dislikes are often just that, personal. Eternal truth is something radically different. The entire truth of God cannot be held in our little minds and with our simpleton languages. This is why Catholics are not and can never be Biblical fundamentalists. The mystics know that the unitive state of the spiritual life is infused contemplation as a direct gift from God alone. This is an unspoken language that communicates one thing: the eternal love of God. This fact must be the only goal and ministry of all called to Christianity. Any thing less is of the evil one. I think I will blog more about this...

thetimman said...

I ask people to refrain from personal invectives. This is not a good thing. Brother Andrew, I think that your statements could unnecessarily hurt feelings rather than foster a real debate.

Javier, your comments I think were also unnecessarily incendiary, and did not add light to this debate.

I was going to tell LMG that she took something personally that wasn't meant personally, but now it is less clear.

Please, please, don't post without considering that there are people at the other end of these internet identities. I value the input of each of you in this little mini-spat, let's just inch away from the cliff a little.

That being said, Brother Andrew, Latin is used in the liturgy because it is the language in which the Church prays. It is the particular liturgical language of the Roman Rite, which I am sure you know. It is elevated, fixed in meaning and of ancient tradition. The only Bible version that has been guaranteed free from error is the Latin Vulgate. No other version has ever received such approbation by the Church Christ founded and guaranteed to triumph over the gates of hell.

As for senses of scripture, the point is to acknowledge that scripture cannot teach error in the sense in which it is intended. The Canticle of Canticles, for instance, is clearly poetry. The Gospels, for instance, are clearly historical records.

Genesis you call a myth story. I understand that "myth" has several possible meanings, one of which is a type of writing about epic events and is not necessarily a label of its truth or falsity. A more common way to understand "myth" is that it isn't really true. We must be clear over the way you use the term before we can have a meaningful debate, don't you think?

Also, I am interested in your take on a sermon over at audio sancto about evolution-- most of it is not germane to this discussion, and I heard this sermon many months ago-- but I seem to remember the priest discoursed on the discussion of the historical reality of the Adam and Eve story.

link here: http://www.audiosancto.org/auweb/20050424-Evolution-a-False-Religious-World-View-Masqueraded-as-Science.mp3